With Burt Rutan`s Race to Space, Dan Linehan tells the dramatic

Transcription

Y
O
P
With Burt Rutan’s Race to Space, Dan Linehan tells the dramatic story
of Burt Rutan’s pioneering aviation work that has included building a
racing biplane, the X Prize–winning SpaceShipOne and Voyager, the
first airplane to fly around the world.
Linehan gives Rutan the credit he is due as one of the architects of
twenty-first century private space travel. As he did with his earlier book,
SpaceShipOne: An Illustrated History, Linehan also shows himself to be
an engaging writer who combines scientific know-how with behind-thescenes reporting that makes this book read like an adventure story.
C
—Paul G. Allen, co-winner of the Ansari X Prize
IE
W
Dan has done a fabulous job of describing the incredible journey of one
of the most accomplished aircraft designers of all time, Burt Rutan. If
you weren’t impressed by Burt before now, you certainly will be after
reading this absolutely fascinating story of the incredible journey of Burt
Rutan—from a young model airplane champion to legendary aircraft
designer among the ranks of Douglas, Heinemann, Lockheed, and Kelly
Johnson.
I personally read it from one end to the other and loved it. This
is a book you will read from cover to cover without being able to put
it down. What a fascinating story of the aircraft designer of our time,
Burt Rutan. His accomplishments as an aircraft designer and builder
revolutionized the way airplanes are made.
Way to go Dan Linehan for creating a mesmerizing collection
of stories!
R
E
V
—Robert “Hoot” Gibson, Space Shuttle Commander
Burt Rutan Page v4.indd 1
2/3/11 2:30:17 PM
Y
O
P
burt rutan’s
The Magician
of Mojave
and His Flying
Innovations
dan linehan
R
E
V
IE
W
C
race to space
Burt Rutan Page v4.indd 2-3
2/3/11 2:30:18 PM
Y
O
P
First published in 2011 by Zenith Press, an imprint of MBI Publishing Company,
400 1st Avenue North, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55401 USA.
Copyright © 2011 by Dan Linehan
All rights reserved. With the exception of quoting brief passages for the purposes of
review, no part of this publication may be reproduced without prior written permission
from the Publisher.
In our modern world, everywhere we look,
we see the influence science has on our daily lives.
C
The information in this book is true and complete to the best of our knowledge.
All recommendations are made without any guarantee on the part of the author or
Publisher, who also disclaim any liability incurred in connection with the use of this
data or specific details.
This publication has been prepared solely by MBI Publishing Company and is not
approved or licensed by any other entity. We recognize that some words, model
names, and designations mentioned herein are the property of the trademark holder.
We use them for identification purposes only. This is not an official publication.
W
Zenith Press titles are also available at discounts in bulk quantity for industrial or
sales-promotional use. For details write to Special Sales Manager at MBI Publishing
Company, 400 1st Avenue North, Minneapolis, MN 55401 USA.
To find out more about our books, join us online at www.zenithpress.com.
Front cover: Top photo by Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images; bottom photo by James A.
Sugar/National Geographic/Getty Images
Back cover: Painting by Stan Stokes
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Many of the things that seem impossible now
will become realities tomorrow.
—Walt Disney, Man in Space
In developing aviation, in making it a form of commerce,
in replacing the wild freedom of danger
with the civilized bonds of safety,
must we give up this miracle of air?
Will men fly through the sky in the future
without seeing what I have seen,
without feeling what I have felt?
Is that true of all things we call human progress—
do the gods retire as commerce and science advance?
—Charles Lindbergh, The Spirit of St. Louis
Printed in China
R
E
V
Linehan, Dan, 1969Burt Rutan’s race to space : the Magician of Mojave and his flying innovations / Dan
Linehan.
p. cm.
Includes index.
ISBN-13: 978-0-7603-3815-5
ISBN-10: 0-7603-3815-9
1. Rutan, Burt. 2. Aeronautical engineers--United States--Biography. 3. Private
planes--United States--Design and construction . 4. Space vehicles--United States. I.
Title.
TL540.R875L56 2011
629.130092--dc22
[B]
2010048870
IE
Editor: Steve Gansen
Designer: Simon Larkin
Discoveries that were miracles a few short years ago
are accepted of as commonplace today.
2/3/11 2:30:18 PM
Y
W
C
O
P
Contents
PAge 9
Preface
PAge 10
PAge 18
Foreword
Chapter 1:
22
23
27 34
35
37
38
42
45
The Stall
The Canard
VariViggen
MiniViggen
Building with Composites
Winglets
VariEze POC
VariViggen SP
VariEze Homebuilt
PAge 50
Rutan Aircraft Factory
Continues to Soar
R
Chapter 3:
The Scaled
Composites Years
Chapter 2:
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
74
76
E
Burt Rutan, from Boyhood
Dreamer to Aerospace
Visionary
Quickie
Defiant
Long-EZ
AD-1
AMSOIL Biplane Racer
Next Generation Trainer
Grizzly
Solitaire
Voyager
Pusher Engines are Pushed Aside
Catbird
Boomerang
V
Introduction:
IE
Rutan Lifts off the Ground
PAge 12
PAge 80
82
83
84
90
Plans End and Plans Begin
Vehicles in all Shapes and Scales
Manned Vehicles: An Overview
The Unmanned and Nonflying
PAge 136
PAge 92
Chapter 5:
Chapter 4:
SpaceShipTwo and
WhiteKnightTwo:
The Next Generation
92
102
108
126
128
138
139
142
147
148
151
SpaceShipOne and White
Knight: The Ascension
SpaceShipOne
Adapting on the Fly
Construction of the Feather
White Knight
Flights and Spaceflights
Sir Richard on Space and Spaceships
SpaceShipTwo
WhiteKnightTwo
Rocket Engine Accident
A Stellar Enterprise
Spaceport America
PAge 156
Afterword
PAge 157
Glossary
PAge 158
Appendix
PAge 160
Index
2/3/11 2:30:20 PM
Y
O
P
Preface
V
IE
W
C
Rutan p 8.tif
100%
Prepress correct
colour
8
R
E
Author Dan Linehan gets the hot seat during this interview (and others) with Burt Rutan in his office at Scaled Composites. Dan Linehan
To cover every detail about every vehicle Burt Rutan
had a hand in designing in one book would be simply
impossible. As of 2010, a total of forty-four different
manned vehicles have been flight-tested between the
two companies he founded, Rutan Aircraft Factory
(RAF) and Scaled Composites. This figure does not even
include unmanned and nonflying vehicles.
This book is not meant to be a biography or a
catalog of airplane and vehicle data. It explores how
Burt evolved as one of the most remarkable aerospace
designers of all time. How did he go from a boy
carving his first model airplanes out of balsa wood to
designing a spacecraft that opened a whole new realm
of space travel? The short answer is that he worked
very hard and kept his mind open to innovation. And
he was guided by the view that some things may
sound impossible, but really they just haven’t been
made possible yet. Burt was not afraid to try to make
things possible.
The first two chapters of this book discuss Rutan’s
early career and the aircraft he developed for RAF.
This period marked the greatest leaps in growth as an
aerospace designer for him. Chapter 3 deals with a
transition point for Burt as RAF closed its hangar doors for
good and Scaled Composites closed its hangar doors to
the public. It was during this period that his technological
achievements made the greatest gains. However, it is
simply not possible to cover all the designs by Scaled
Composites in detail for two reasons. First, the large
number of projects done by Scaled Composites would
require many books to adequately cover them, not just
part of a single book. And second, Scaled Composites
has a policy of being very tight-lipped about the firm’s
customers and the details of its projects.
The design of SpaceShipOne, a true example of
elegance in engineering, is analyzed in chapter 4. The
final chapter culminates with SpaceShipTwo, the vehicle
that will realize Burt’s childhood dream of someday
reaching space.
I was born halfway between the time when humans first
orbited the Moon and the time when humans first landed
on the Moon. I grew up in an aviation household, with
my dad flying for the navy and then for United Airlines.
And I was a kid when Burt’s designs first hit the air. A
combination of these and maybe a few other factors really
led me to identify with Burt. I know I am not alone in this.
I had the amazing fortune to work closely with Burt
on this book. I was lucky to let my inner child loose
a bit. I can’t thank him enough for all his time and
patience. Thank you, Tonya, for your hospitality. It also
was wonderful getting to know Brian, Mike, Dan, and
the rest of the Scaled Composites crew over the course
of two books, and I very much appreciate the time they
could give me.
I am grateful for the assistance I received from
great people while writing this book, including those
from Virgin Galactic, Vulcan, the Experimental Aircraft
Association (EAA), the X Prize Foundation, NASA, the
Monterey Navy Flying Club, Mojave Air & Space Port,
and many more. This book wouldn’t be possible if it
weren’t for the enthusiasm and support given my first
book. I’d like to specially thank Ray at the National
Space Society and Kristin at the EAA. Aarzoo, you live
up to your name, and I can’t express my thankfulness
enough to you. And to my family and friends, your
understanding kept me going.
—Dan Linehan
9
2/3/11 2:30:20 PM
E
V
IE
4.11o.tif
75%
R
On 21 June 2004, Mike Melvill flew SpaceShipOne to space for the first time. This milestone accomplishment was
one of Burt Rutan’s biggest personal goals even though this spaceflight did not meet the qualifications to count as
an attempt for the Ansari X Prize. It was still the first ever privately funded, designed, built, and operated manned
spacecraft to reach space. Burt Rutan and Paul Allen were right there to congratulate the new astronaut as he
stepped from SpaceShipOne. Tyson V. Rininger
10
O
P
C
I took my family to California, and we visited Burt
in his brand new facility, Building 13 on the flightline
of Mojave Airport, home of the Rutan Aircraft Factory
(RAF). He seated me in the rear cockpit of his plane and
proceeded to demonstrate its amazing flight capabilities
as well as its shortcomings. Then he allowed me to fly
his creation from the front seat. What a thrill that was
and it helped immensely to make for a much safer first
flight of my own VariViggen not long after we returned
from California.
A year later, my wife Sally (also a licensed pilot) and
I flew our VariViggen to Portland, Oregon, and then on
to San Jose, California, on a business trip. On the way
back we landed at Mojave Airport and visited with Burt.
He jumped into my plane and flew it for thirty minutes
or so, evaluating it and making several landings. He
proclaimed that it passed muster and took us out to
lunch. After eating a delicious meal, he offered me a
job. On the way home I was so excited I could hardly fly
straight! Sally was also very supportive of the idea, and
the rest is history, so to speak.
W
I am honored indeed to have been asked to pen this
foreword for Dan’s book. This book is an accurate
history of Burt Rutan and his brilliant career. When you,
the reader, have read these words and enjoyed the more
than two hundred photos included in it, you will have a
very complete knowledge of Burt’s almost unbelievable
technical capabilities and of his fanatical sense of
how technology can be used to change and improve
aerospace, including some things that weren’t meant to
fly at all.
I first met Burt at the Experimental Aircraft
Association (EAA) convention in Oshkosh in 1974. I was
looking for a suitable aircraft design to build in my living
room. Burt was selling plans for his first homebuilt design
out of the back seat of his new VariViggen, right on the
flightline! As it turned out, I was the first “homebuilder”
to complete a copy of Burt’s VariViggen. My friends and I
were a bit concerned about making the first flight of this
obviously very different airplane, so I called Burt to get
some advice. He told me that he would happily check me
out in his VariViggen if I would visit Mojave.
and flown by as many builders. Indeed some are still
under construction, and I continue to hear about new
first flights several times each year and have done so for
the past twenty-five years.
RAF closed down in 1985, and Burt has
concentrated his efforts on Scaled Composites, a
company he founded in 1982 in order to create a
more favorable environment to further his design
and engineering skills. He has been one of my best
friends for the past thirty-two years. He has been a
fair and a generous boss to Sally and me and to all of
his employees over the years. Scaled started in 1982
with only six employees, and today has four hundred
employees. The work that is done there is state of the
art and in some cases has literally been history making.
Burt designed and indeed even physically worked
on what was called inhouse the Tier One program. This
program became world renowned as we made the first
ever successful flights to space that were not paid for by
government funds. Prior to SpaceShipOne’s first flight
to space on 21 June 2004, all flights to space were
funded by large governments: Russia, China, and the
United States. This achievement was further recognized
when three months later the Scaled team flew two
space flights within five days of each other, thus winning
the $10 million Ansari X Prize for our sponsor, Paul
Allen. Paul very generously shared this prize money with
Scaled Composites, and the company, in turn, shared
the bounty with each Scaled employee, an excellent
way to retain great talent when living in so desolate a
place as Mojave! SpaceShipOne is now on display at
the National Air and Space Museum, hanging above the
museum’s main entrance between Charles Lindbergh’s
Spirit of Saint Louis and Chuck Yeager’s supersonic Bell
X-1, with the Voyager not far from sight.
Currently, the Scaled Composites team is busy flight
testing a new design known as SpaceShipTwo, a followup project funded by Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic
and intended to eventually provide rides to space on
a commercial basis. Burt recently announced that he
will retire in April 2011. It will be interesting to watch
the continuing progress of Scaled Composites where
Burt has left an unbelievable legacy of truly astonishing
aircraft designs and ensured that there is a cadre of
exceptional designers, engineers, and test pilots with an
unmatched shop full of the best composite fabricators in
the world.
Y
Foreword
Sally and I joined RAF as full-time employees on
22 September 1978. I was to support those builders
who were working on a VariViggen, while Burt would
concentrate on supporting the builders of his latest
design, the VariEze. Sally became the receptionist/
bookkeeper. This state of affairs continued for six
months, and then Burt announced that he wanted me
to take over VariEze builder support. In order to qualify
to do this, he asked me to build a VariEze. I drove
to Aircraft Spruce and purchased an entire VariEze
raw material kit, including a pair of scissors and a
decimal tape measure. I also picked up all available
prefabricated parts from Ken Brock Manufacturing
(machined parts and weldments) and from Fred Jiran,
who fabricated the landing gear, cowling, wheel fairings,
etc., at Mojave Airport.
I started building and learning the entire process.
When I had completed the canard and elevators for
the VariEze, Burt announced that the last thing RAF
needed was another VariEze and that he was designing
a new flying machine, later known as the Long-EZ. This
move was based on feedback received from VariEze
builders. The new aircraft would be a bigger version of
the VariEze, with lots more range and the ability to carry
a starter and alternator. Since I had already completed
the canard assembly, he decided to use it on the new
design. This is why the VariEze and Long-EZ have the
same canard!
For his brother Dick, Burt designed the Voyager, an
all carbon fiber design that was intended to fly all the
way around the world at the equator without refueling.
No aircraft had ever flown anywhere near this distance
nonrefueled, and many people, including myself, were
skeptical. But in December of 1986, Dick together with
Jeana Yeager took off from Edwards Air Force Base
and, after circling the globe completely, landed back
at Edwards a bit more than nine days later to smash
all existing long-distance flight records. The Voyager
now hangs in the National Air & Space Museum in
Washington, D.C.
Burt is an incredibly prolific designer of composite
aircraft. To date, he has fabricated and flown forty-four
of his sometimes astonishing designs in the past thirtynine years—more than one new aircraft design per year!
It’s a feat no other designer has ever even approached.
He is able to literally “see” where the air will go as it
flows around the shape he has created. He also has an
amazing ability to visualize the loading of a composite
structure while in flight. All of his flown designs had
good flying qualities and were generally much more
efficient than standard category aircraft. More than two
thousand of his homebuilt designs have been completed
—Mike Melvill
First commercial astronaut
Tehachapi, California
1 November 2010
11
2/3/11 2:30:21 PM
Y
intro.jpg
106%
Painting by Stan Stokes
12
R
E
V
IE
W
C
O
P
Introduction
Burt Rutan,
from Boyhood Dreamer
to Aerospace Visionary
“Fortunately, we need not rely solely on governments for expanding humanity’s presence
beyond the Earth.”—Arthur C. Clarke, from the foreword of SpaceShipOne: An Illustrated History
The National Air and Space Museum (NASM) of the
Smithsonian Institution displays Burt Rutan’s most
celebrated achievements, including SpaceShipOne,
which won the coveted $10 million Ansari X Prize
for private spaceflight; Voyager, which hangs with
SpaceShipOne in the Milestones of Flight gallery; the
Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer; and the prototype VariEze
homebuilt. His many aerospace innovations preceding
his initial designs of SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo
chronicle a progressive, step-by-step attempt to break
barriers with engineering know-how and a wondrous
imagination, all the while remaining on the forefront of
the burgeoning private spaceflight industry. Rutan’s X
Prize triumph and his hand in subsequent spacecraft
designs are not a beginning, nor an end, but are steps in
Burt Rutan’s continuing adventure to expand humanity’s
presence beyond Earth and into space.
Around 1946 to 1957, some mighty big jumps
happened in the aerospace community. The jet age
began, and so did the missile age. Propellers and
pistons abdicated to jet engines and rocket engines
as the new state of the art in aerospace. Rutan was
between the ages of three and fourteen during these
years. He now travels comfortably in the circles of
“astropreneurs”—those wealthy individuals who
2.1A FPO.tif
From 1967 to 1975, Burt Rutan worked only on his
own designs for RAF. But as others got to see his work
in action, especially how quickly brand-new designs
were coming out of the hangar onto the flightline, his
drawing board would be used to not just design his own
aircraft but also to help design aircraft for customers.
Courtesy of Burt Rutan
13
2/3/11 2:30:22 PM
E
V
IE
3.6a.jpg
83%
R
A flip of the coin determined who would fly the Wright Flyer in 1903 from Kill Devil
Hill outside Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. Orville won the toss. His flight covered 120
feet and lasted 12 seconds. It was the first time a powered aircraft, heavier than air,
flew under control and over a sustained period of time. NASA
14
Y
O
P
3.6b.jpg
77%
C
to veer into more adventurous paths and the aviation
renaissance really bloomed.
Like Rutan and other witnesses to the Apollo
mission milestones, the pioneers in the early decades of
flight were impressionable kids when this new invention
sparked their imaginations. “You can look at anything
that’s high technology,” Rutan said. “It happens in
spurts. Had we not had Apollo, for example, if we had
beaten the Russians with Alan Shepard instead of Yuri
Gagarin, or, if we had beaten the Russians with Explorer
instead of Sputnik—those two races were only weeks
apart, not years or decades—and had we not found the
need for national prestige to do something great like go
to the Moon, it is possible—and this is just a gut feeling
from me, there’s very little proof—that these billionaires
who are fascinated and enthralled by commercial space
may have spent their money on other things if they
weren’t, as children, shown that enormous progress can
be done in a very short period of time.”
Burt Rutan has two dominant parts to his personality;
he can be focused, and he can be severe. But he also
has a good wit to temper his outspoken nature. For
instance, he is not shy in his criticism of NASA, especially
regarding what he sees as its retreat from the ambitious
goals of the Apollo generation, the kind of goals that led
W
invest sizable amounts of their collective fortune in
commercial, manned space programs, people like Paul
Allen (Mojave Aerospace Ventures), Richard Branson
(Virgin Galactic), Robert Bigelow (Bigelow Aerospace),
Elon Musk (SpaceX), Jeff Bezos (Blue Origin), and John
Carmack (Armadillo Aerospace).
In terms of their formative years, these astropreneurs
grew up during the Apollo space program. Rutan sees
them as being young and impressionable during this
time period, similar to children who grew up in the
early years of flight and went on to become leaders in
twentieth-century aviation.
To commemorate the one-hundredth anniversary
of the Wright brothers’ first flight in 1903, Aviation
Week asked Burt Rutan to come up with a list of the
ten people he thought had been the most influential
in aerospace since this milestone. His list included
Wernher von Braun, Kelly Johnson, Charles Lindbergh,
and Howard Hughes, among others.
“Everybody I put on my list was a young child during
this big spurt of aviation progress from 1908 until the
First World War,” Rutan said. Before this period, less
than a dozen people had ever piloted an airplane. Aside
from the Wrights, most flying had been in a straight
line. That all changed in 1908 when aviation learned
A wonderful comparison between the capsules and rockets of NASA’s early spaceflight missions, the diagram shows the single-person Mercury
capsule, the two-person Gemini capsule, and the three-person Apollo capsule, which is sandwiched between its rocket-powered service module
and gangly lunar lander. A much larger difference exists between the rockets used to get these capsules into space, Apollo’s Saturn V (left),
Gemini’s Titan (center), and Mercury’s Atlas (right). NASA
Rutan to dream of outposts on Mars and other planets.
Rutan once said, “The thing you got to do is to
always challenge yourself with something that you don’t
think you can do. . . . If you think you can do it, and
you maybe even know that you can do it, it’s not true
research because you can’t be innovative. You can’t
have a breakthrough. You’re removing your opportunity
to do that.”
In his view, NASA’s struggles in moving manned
spaceflight out of Earth’s orbit are directly related to its
culture of thinking small over the past few decades. “All
the stuff they’re doing they know will work, which means
they can’t stumble into new ideas to help us get to more
interesting places than the Moon—the moons of the outer
planets that actually have oceans below the surface. And
we are not going to get there unless somebody goes out
and takes risks and tries stuff that may not work.”
Today, a simple, ordinary-looking manila folder of
model numbers exists in Burt Rutan’s office.
Once opened, pistons roar, jet wash spills out, and
rocket plumes light up the room, like some kind of
aviation mysticism.
It is thick with page after page of flying machines—
record breakers, racers, world flyers, spaceships, and
many other aerial innovations. Some eventually spring to
life. Some don’t.
“Anytime I get something that is at least to a threeview and a spec and something—even if it is not
necessarily going to be built—I put a model number on
it,” Rutan said.
With a grin that looks as if he’s about to show off
a map to secret treasure or a book of magic spells, he
says, “I’ll give you a peek at it, so you can see the kind
of depth of it. It is not very deep.”
15
2/3/11 2:30:23 PM
Oh, but it certainly is. The file includes a napkin
sketch for Voyager he made for his brother, Dick Rutan,
and Jeana Yeager. Dick and Jeana would go on to pilot
Voyager around the world.
His first manned aircraft to fly, the VariViggen, is
Model 27. He was able to go back and distinguish
twenty-six prior versions that directly led to this aircraft.
They were model airplanes, and they were also
concepts that never left the paper. But each one was a
step toward flight.
“I just assigned a new model number this morning,
357,” he said in June 2009. “And that’s—I can’t tell you
what it is. But, 356 was a turboprop Boomerang, which
we are doing for Dale Johnson, who wants to put the
Boomerang in production as an eight-place turboprop.
Dynamite airplane.”
In many cases, the model numbers ended up being
painted on airplanes as tail numbers. For instance, the
tail number of Virgin Galactic’s prototype SpaceShipTwo,
Model 339, is N339SS. All aircraft from North America
have tail numbers that begin with N, and SS in this
case stands for SpaceShip. The VariViggen prototype is
N27VV, which is straightforward to decode. Sometimes
customers have their own tail number in mind. Danny
Mortensen’s prototype AMSOIL Biplane Racer, Model
68, is N301LS. “Sometimes I just put dashes. It is not a
hard and fast thing that I stick to,” Rutan added.
Burt Rutan’s Race to Space seeks to reveal
how these model numbers in Burt’s prized folders
tranformed into revolutionary aircraft and spaceships.
We’ll start by focusing on his design work on the F-4
Phantom at Edwards Air Force Base, when he was a
flight test project engineer in the years 1965 to 1972,
and move onward and upward to SpaceShipOne and
SpaceShipTwo, the designs that announced the birth of
the private spaceflight industry to the world.
C
O
P
Y
2.1c.jpg
94%
IE
W
2.1b FPO.tif
This is being keyed and will be
recreated, correct?
16
R
E
V
It didn’t take much to spark a gathering. This particular
event drew nearly ninety Rutan designs and spinoffs.
Taken at a time when Scaled Composites was in full
swing, this photograph cannot show the other good
things inside the hangar. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
This diagram, first published in Canard Pusher, shows the project timelines for Burt Rutan’s first twenty-one
designs. The first fifteen were Rutan Aircraft Factory vehicles, which included the U.S. Navy Power-Augmented
Ram Landing Craft (PARLC). The Boomerang design began several years after this time period. The last six were
part of Scaled Composites, a new company founded in 1982 to work on proprietary stuff. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
17
2/3/11 2:30:24 PM
Y
Chapter 1
O
P
1.0 FPO.tif
Burt Rutan’s work on the F-4 Phantom proved to be a substantial influence not only on the
first manned aircraft he designed and flew but also on many others to follow. The F-4 faced
a deadly problem with unrecoverable flat spins. The only thing the pilots could do when
trapped in this situation was to yank on the ejection handle, if they were lucky enough to
have time to do so.
1.1a,jpg
75%
V
IE
W
C
Rutan Lifts off
the Ground
18
R
E
Burt Rutan wasn’t the first to use canards, but he certainly was the first to make an
art form out of his planforms. The VariViggen, with its hammerhead-shaped nose,
sweptback fighter-like wings, and external fuel tank, was the first airplane that he
designed, built, and flew. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
Designed during World War II but first flown after the
war, the Convair B-36 Peacemaker was the largest
bomber ever built. It proved to be an early inspiration
to Burt Rutan. With a wingspan of 230 feet, the B-36A
had six Pratt & Whitney R-4360 radial pusher engines.
Modifications to later models included the addition of
four jet engines. USAF
Rutan was able to help develop a procedure where
pilots could reduce the probability of entering a flat spin
after the aircraft departed from controlled flight, allowing
them to return to base with the aircraft intact. In order
to accomplish this, Rutan, in the backseat, and test
pilot Jerry Gentry flew the fighter through more than a
hundred departures—a departure is when the aircraft
does not respond to the pilot’s control inputs—and
normal spins with the aid of a specially designed spinrecovery parachute. They became the first ever to
recover from a flat spin in an F-4 Phantom.
In an article Rutan wrote for Sport Aviation shortly
after leaving the USAF, he stated: “Stall/Spin is the
major cause of general aviation fatal accidents. NASA
and the FAA are currently investigating the problem
by evaluating and correlating the spin characteristics
of current designs, evaluating new pilot training
procedures, proposing instrumentation, and other
methods. I feel strongly that too little emphasis had
been placed on designing the overall configuration for
safe high angle of attack flying qualities and that not all
the important criteria are being considered.”
His solution to this was to create an aircraft that
would not stall.
19
2/3/11 2:30:24 PM
1.1B FPO.tif
Graduated from Cal Poly,
San Luis Obispo, CA (1965)
Y
1965
1966
O
P
1967
Flight Test Engineer
for USAF, Edwards AFB, CA
and St. Louis, MO
(6/65-3/72)
1968
Construction of VariViggen begins (1968)
1969
Rutan Aircraft Factory (RAF) founded (1969)
1970
C
1971
Director of Bede Test Center,
Bede Aircraft, Newton, KS
(3/72-5/74)
W
IE
VariViggen first flight, Newton, KS (5/72)
VariViggen first flown to EAA Fly-In Convention,
Oshkosh, WI (7/72)
1973
1974
Rutan relocates to Mojave, CA,
to work full-time on RAF (6/74)
VariEze POC first flown to EAA Fly-In
Convention, Oshkosh, WI (7/75)
1975
VariEze POC breaks distance
world’s record, Oshkosh, WI (8/75)
VariEze POC first flight, Mojave, CA (5/75)
VariViggen SP first flight Mojave, CA (7/75)
1976
Above: During the twelve-year period shown in the
timeline, Burt Rutan started his aerospace career as
a flight test engineer at Edwards Air Force Base. He
worked for Bede Aircraft afterward and then returned
to Mojave to work full time on his own company, Rutan
Aircraft Factory. Over this time, he made first flights on
four models that he designed, one of which set the first
of many world records his designs would come to earn.
Dan Linehan
Homebuilt VariEze first flight, Mojave, CA (3/76)
Homebuilt VariEze first flown to EAA Fly-In
Convention, Oshkosh, WI (7/76)
1.1E FPO.tif
Right: Burt Rutan’s futuristic design drew attention
from the farthest reaches, even from a galaxy far, far
away. Never noticed this before, but Vader also sports
a serious set of sideburns. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
20
R
E
Right: Walt Disney (left) and Wernher von Braun (right)
show off a model of the XR-1 that was featured in a
three-part Disneyland television program that Burt
Rutan watched as a kid in the 1950s. The XR-1 was
the last stage of a four-stage rocket that von Braun
designed to fly astronauts into orbit and then glide back
down to Earth. NASA
1.1c.jpg
39%
V
Above: When Burt Rutan went to the store to buy his
first model airplane, at an age too young for him to
remember, his mother worried that he would become
frustrated by not being able to put together the
prefabricated parts. To her surprise, he returned with
only blocks of wood and then carved his own airplane.
Years later, he would go on to become a champion
model airplane builder and flyer.
1972
Bought BD-5 kit to use parts
to build MiniViggen (1971)
21
2/3/11 2:30:26 PM
The Canard
1.3a.jpg
75%
Prepress please
color correct
Conventional Aircraft
Normal Flight
Main wing
creates all lift
Chord line Horizontal stabilizer
pushes downward
IE
Slower Flight
W
Airflow
1.3b.tif
44.4%
Airflow
Chord line
Below: If there was one aircraft that echoed in the mind
of Burt Rutan as a young engineer, it had to be the
Swedish Saab 37 Viggen. The multirole fighterjet used a
canard to give it better short landing and takeoff ability.
With a max speed above Mach 2, the Viggen had an
approach speed of only 137 miles per hour. Saab
Above: For an aircraft with a canard that is flying
straight and level, as it slows down, the nose also
pitches up like a conventional aircraft. However, as the
angle of attack increases, the canard is designed to
stall before the wing. When the canard stalls, the nose
cannot rise any farther. This prevents the wing, and
thus the aircraft, from stalling. Dan Linehan
1.3d.jpg
57%
Very Slow Flight and Stalls
Airflow
V
As a flight test engineer for the USAF, Burt Rutan (third
from the right) performed his duties in the backseat
of the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom. A frontline
fighter-bomber during the Vietnam War, the F-4 had a
problem where under certain conditions it would depart
into a nonrecoverable flat spin. Rutan helped devise
a solution for pilots that used a drogue chute to avoid
entry into the flat spin.
Angle of attack
equals 10°
Normal Flight
1.3c.tif
So Rutan sought to eliminate the dangers poised by
49%
Airflow
stalls by effectively designing them out of the airplane.
He did this with the canard, the little tail attached to the
nose instead of the backend of the fuselage like on most
Canard also
other airplanes.
Main wing
creates lift
“I was entranced for some reason—I don’t know
creates most lift
why—by the Saab Viggen,” Rutan recalled of the
Slower Flight
Swedish fighterjet back during his college days. “The
B-70 hadn’t flown yet. There were pictures of it, this
new, super, Mach 3 bomber that’s being built.”
Airflow
Both these aircraft had canards. While still in
college, Rutan did some canard building of his own.
Angle of attack
“I found out with a RC model, and I found out by
equals 10°
doing a little wind tunnel model, that I could get natural
stall limiting. And I was absolutely fascinated by that,”
Very Slow Flight but Does not Stall
he said. “Whether it was forward or aft CG, I could take
the airplane full aft stick and run up to a certain angle
of attack and then pull all you want and it doesn’t go
Airflow
higher. This is a big safety thing.”
As the end of Rutan’s USAF career neared, he began
Canard stalls before
to work on the brand new F-15 Eagle.
Angle of attack stays
main wing stalls,
“I was intimately familiar with the flight control
nose cannot go higher less than wing stall limit
systems on the F-15 because I was an air force guy, a
O
P
provide the expected lift and the aircraft departs from
controlled flight.
But angle of attack is the key term here.
Imagine a pilot flying straight and level. The angle that
the aircraft makes with the oncoming air is the angle of
attack. Or, more precisely, the angle between the relative
wind and the chord line, which is a reference line drawn
from the front edge of the wing’s airfoil cross-section
to the back edge. If the pilot pulls the nose up and the
aircraft is still flying straight and level, the angle of attack
has increased. The angle that the aircraft’s nose points
in relation to the direction of the air’s movement has
increased. So if the pilot pulls back even more while still
flying straight and level, the angle of attack becomes even
greater. At some point this angle reaches the critical value
and the air moving over the wing goes haywire.
Generally speaking, if the pilot pulls the stick back
too much, causing the nose to rise too much, and
airspeed is too slow, then the condition is ripe for a stall.
C
It is extremely important to understand what a stall is
and how a stall is caused because conquering the stall
was the primary focus of Rutan’s early designs.
A stall occurs when air no longer flows smoothly
over a wing, causing the wing to lose its ability to create
lift. Without lift, airplanes don’t fly. They become big,
giant falling objects. Stalls are especially dangerous at
low altitudes, like when landing or taking off. A pilot
needs time to correct the problem, and altitude equals
time. Also, when a hazardous spin occurs, it is typically
trigged by a stall.
So what happens to the air to cause it not to flow
smoothly over the wing in the first place, eventually
leading to a stall? A wing has a shape, known as an
airfoil, specially designed to interact with the air to cause
lift. This favorable interaction only occurs when the wing
moves through the air within a range of orientations.
Once outside this range, when the airplane’s angle of
attack exceeds a critical value, the airfoil fails to properly
Y
The Stall
Canard Aircraft
22
R
E
Angle of attack
greater than stall limit
Separated airflow is highly
chaotic and turbulent, causing
main wing to stop lifting and stall
Three views of a conventional aircraft flying straight
and level but at different speeds: As speed decreases,
the nose pitches up, but the direction of the oncoming
airflow stays the same. A stall occurs once the angle
of attack becomes too large. At this point, air can no
longer flow smoothly over the wing, and the wing can
no longer generate lift. Dan Linehan
23
2/3/11 2:30:28 PM
W
C
O
P
1.3e.jpg
77%
R
E
V
Burt Rutan created is his own wind tunnel, and as long as the pavement didn’t run
out, there was plenty of wind to test his designs. By attaching a model to an array of
sensors mounted on top of the family car, he was able to collect flight data from a set
of instruments as he sat in the passenger seat. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
24
Y
1.4b.jpg
70%
IE
flight test planner, getting ready for the air force to flight
test the F-15 in a few months.”
The F-15 didn’t have fly-by-wire, a flight control
system using a computer to limit how a pilot can fly a
plane, as did the F-16 Fighting Falcon, which entered
service afterwards. The F-15 didn’t have a canard either,
so it did not have natural stall limiting.
“I was fascinated by having no electronics, no
servos, no control augmentation, no sensors, no
hydraulic system, and still getting natural stall limiting,”
Rutan said.
There is another advantage to using a canard. The
horizontal stabilizer of the tail for a conventional aircraft
is a small wing just like the canard is a small wing.
Besides the obvious that the horizontal stabilizer is in
the back of a conventional aircraft and a canard is in the
front, there’s a very big difference in how they operate.
The horizontal stabilizer is actually designed to push
with a downward force. In other words, a horizontal
stabilizer doesn’t create lift, it does the opposite.
However, the canard doesn’t behave this way. It actually
creates a lift.
So in a conventional aircraft the main wing creates
the lift and the tail’s horizontal stabilizer doesn’t. This
makes the main wing have to lift more. But for an
aircraft with a canard, both the canard and the main
wing create lift.
How exactly does stall limiting work with a canard?
The canard prevents an aircraft from stalling by
preventing the main wing from stalling. The canard does
this by actually stalling itself at an angle of attack lower
than the angle of attack that will trigger a stall on the
main wing. If the pilot pulls back too much on the stick,
all of the sudden the lift normally created by the canard
does not increase any more. As a result, the nose does
not go any higher, even when the pilot pulls the stick
back further. So the pilot cannot force the wing above its
stall angle of attack.
And Rutan took full advantage of this.
1.3f.jpg
75%
Above: An encounter on a runway with a North
American B-70 Valkyrie and its row of afterburning
jet engines more than resonated with Burt Rutan.
Capable of flying Mach 3.1, the B-70 had a canard
to control pitch and wingtips that folded downward
to improve stability during supersonic flight. Only two
were ever constructed. B-70 test pilot Fitz Fulton would
eventually fly for Scaled Composites. NASA
Left: Burt Rutan spent several months in St. Louis at
McDonnell Douglas working on the brand new F-15
Eagle. It flew at a top speed of Mach 2.5 but did not
have a fly-by-wire flight control system as most modern
fighters now do. Rutan left before the F-15 began flight
testing to work for Jim Bede. USAF
25
2/3/11 2:30:30 PM
1.2a.jpg
70%
Y
VariViggen
5
1.2b.pdf
42%
5
1
4
1
4
3
10
12
9
14
E
6
14
R
16
16
15
13
12
9
15
13
10
6
James Linehan
11
8
7
2
26
8
7
3
2
11
Designs from Rutan Aircraft
Factory, 1972 to 1996
1—Voyager (Model 76)
2—VariEze POC (Model 31)
3—Next Generation Trainer (Model 73)
4—AMSOIL Biplane Racer (Model 68)
5—Quickie (Model 54)
6—VariEze Homebuilt (Model 33)
7—Long-EZ (Model 61)
8—Defiant (Model 40)
9—Boomerang (Model 202)
10—AD-1 (Model 35)
11—VariViggen (Model 27)
12—Catbird (Model 81)
13—Grizzly (Model 72)
14—Solitaire (Model 77)
15—PARLC
16—Mojave Pyramid House
1.4c.jpg
77%
VariViggen Design
The other major inspiration for his first aircraft was the
Swedish Saab Viggen. This supersonic fighter sported
a canard, a small wing forward of the main wing, that
gave it excellent short takeoff and landing capabilities.
Besides, it was really a great looking airplane.
“In those days, I was a back-seater only, of course,”
Rutan admitted. “I always was. I wasn’t a rated military
pilot. I was a flight test engineer. So I got to go Mach 2.
I got to pull 8 g. I got to go to fifty thousand feet. But I’m
in the back, and the blue-suiter is flying. So I wanted to
have my own fighter.”
The airplane Rutan wanted for himself had to have a
phenomenal roll rate and be able to turn like a fighter. It
had to be very fun to fly.
“I had done these very rough designs and wind
tunnel tests for it while I was still in college,” Rutan
said. “And out of college I decided that I needed a lot
better data to evaluate its feasibility. I had sorted out an
interesting way to get trimmed, three-axis stability and
control data on a new type of wind tunnel model mount.
I used the idea on a rig on top of a car, driven down the
road to make the needed wind. The setup had a little
flat plate, so it measured the dynamic pressure, so I
could also measure model drag.”
He built an instrument panel with voltmeters on
it, and he had a little reel-to-reel tape recorder. With
somebody else driving the car, he’d sit there changing the
elevator position, which would change the angle of attack.
“I read all these instruments into the tape, and then
later I’d listened to the tape and write everything down.
I’d thus have flight test data I needed. This was done
1.4a.jpg
102%
V
IE
W
C
O
P
It is not coincidence that Burt Rutan drew inspiration for
the VariViggen from military aircraft. The construction
of the VariViggen began while he still worked as a flight
test engineer for the USAF. Now that the sleek, giant,
and futuristic-looking B-70 Valkyrie was flying, Rutan
got to see it up close, very close.
“It’s sitting at the runway for takeoff at Edwards,”
Rutan said of the B-70. “We’re number two for takeoff,
Jerry Gentry and me in an F-4 Phantom. We have the
canopies up, in very close proximity to the Valkyrie. We
are not behind, of course. We are just a little bit to the
side. It’s holding its brakes, and it runs up to full military
power. Then, one at a time, we see all six of those
engines go into afterburner. The heat and noise were so
fierce that it hurt, even wearing our helmets. We closed
the F-4’s canopies to avoid serious ear damage. The
Valkyrie starts rolling, rolling. After it starts moving, they
clear us into position and hold. So we are sitting on the
runway now, watching it go down the runway directly in
front of us.”
Moving his hand over an imaginary three-mile-long
runway and then lifting off, Rutan continued, “It comes
up like this—nose way above its tail—and you get to
see the full planform of it as it staggers into the air. I’ll
never, ever forget that sight. That was very cool.”
While writing this book, I found myself running
along quite a distance of runway fence at Mojave, two
days after the unveiling of SpaceShipTwo, trying to get
a better look at Proteus doing touch-and-go landings.
I wonder how much Rutan realizes that decades later,
people like me get that same type of feeling seeing one
of Scaled Composite’s designs lifting off into the sky.
Construction of the VariViggen began in 1968 while
Burt Rutan worked at Edwards Air Force Base.
However, the ideas he had for its design began when
he was an engineering student at California Polytechnic
State University in San Luis Obispo. Courtesy of Burt
Rutan
The A-12, “tail number” FX-935, was Burt Rutan’s
official Model 1. The Saab Viggen strongly influenced
the design of this RC model. Featuring a canard and
push-pull engines, the A-12 evolved twenty-six designs
later into Model 27, the VariViggen.
27
2/3/11 2:30:31 PM
E
V
IE
1.4d FPO.tif
R
Designed to be Burt Rutan’s own fighterlike airplane, the VariViggen, shown here in three-view, looked more like
an airplane found at an air force base rather than at a town’s local airstrip. The canard, bubble canopy, sweptback
wing, twin vertical stabilizers, and pusher engine gave it an undeniable futuristic aurora when the VariViggen first
began to fly. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
28
O
P
Y
1.4e FPO.tif
C
What would then become Model 1 didn’t look at all
like the VariViggen, but it looked like the Saab Viggen.
That was about it for similarities, though. A singleplace design, the pilot would lie on his stomach. But
the model of the tiny airplane, calling for a two-stroke
pusher engine, wouldn’t even balance.
“It was a dangerous thing. I mean it was crazy,”
Rutan said.
Rutan had been building airplanes nearly his whole
life. In 1968 at that age of twenty-five, now a flight test
engineer and already a pilot, he began construction.
To this point, his models had all been made out of
wood. Using classic airplane building techniques, he
also constructed the VariViggen out of wood, with two
noteworthy exceptions. To gain experience working
with metal, he built the outer wings and the rudders
out of aluminum.
“When I built it, I didn’t take pictures, and I didn’t
make drawings of it. I built this airplane without
making drawings because, from model airplanes, I
knew how to build an airplane. I knew how to make
stress calculations. I knew how thick the spar I
needed, how big a bolt I needed to hold the wings on.
I made those calculations.”
W
while my day job was flight test engineer on the XC-142,
the F-4, and other projects.”
By using his car top wind tunnel, he now felt
comfortable that he indeed had a design with natural
stall limiting that would also be very fun to fly. Rutan
didn’t focus on optimizing the airplane’s speed, range,
or efficiency.
“You know it wasn’t a very good airplane for
performance, particularly up high because it had a lot of
induced drag,” Rutan said.
What is considered not very good performance is
relative, especially when goals like building the most
efficient airplane are considered. Rutan would also be
quick to point out that many of the aircraft flying then
did not have very good performance.
The VariViggen was a first step. However, he did not
want to call the VariViggen his Model 1, even though it
was his first full-sized airplane to fly.
“I built that RC model that was a totally different
airplane. And I modified it. Then I tried something
else in a wind tunnel. I went back and tried to identify
every change that was substantial that I had made in
developing the VariViggen from a design standpoint. I
came up and said this will be Model 27.”
Fun to Fly
Rutan now had himself a jet fighter, just without the
jet engine. “I didn’t think about selling plans then,”
Rutan said about the aircraft initially. “The VariViggen
was for me.”
In 1972, still an employee of Bede, with only
seventy-five hours flown on the VariViggen, Rutan flew
to the Experimental Aircraft Association’s (EAA) annual
fly-in and convention held at Oshkosh, Wisconsin.
Known as AirVenture, it remains one of the premier
air shows in the world. Originally founded to support
homebuilders, the EAA now draws all matters of plane,
pilot, and aerospace enthusiasts.
This was an impressive stage for the young upstart
Rutan to make his first showing. And the crowd went
wild for the VariViggen. Reaction was so strong that in
less than two years he would strike off on his own and
start selling plans.
In the meantime, Rutan didn’t miss many
opportunities to show off his new creation. He and
his second wife, Carolyn, returned for a visit to the
Though Burt Rutan is very well known for his innovative
use of composite construction, this cutaway drawing
shows how the VariViggen’s fuselage was built out of
wood and its wing was made with aluminum. Courtesy
of Burt Rutan
29
2/3/11 2:30:32 PM
wanted a ride. Rutan obliged. They taxied out but had to
wait quite a while for airliners.
“I had landed a couple hours before. I think it was
the same shift that was there, and they saw this thing fly
in. They were really curious about getting a better look
at this thing. They called me before they cleared me on
the runway, and they said, ‘Listen, we’d really like to
get a better look at that. Could you come out here and
maybe circle the tower when you takeoff.’
“And I said, ‘Well, how close do you want me to
fly to the tower?’ They then said, ‘Use your discretion.’
Wow, I’m getting that discretion freedom from a FAA
controller in a control tower at a large commercial
airport.”
Because the backseat headset was broken, it was
hard for Rutan to communicate this to the passenger in
the backseat. And the tower had just cleared them for
immediate takeoff. Airliners waited behind them.
“He’s thinking I’m kind of a wild guy anyway cause
I’m out here in Kansas flying homebuilt airplanes,”
Rutan said. “And I don’t work for the air force anymore,
so I might not be real strict about the normal rules. He
is a flight test pilot who flies F-4s and F-15s in a mixed
commercial airport and who knows how important it is
to do everything by the book. And he’s in the back in
the VariViggen.
“We just rotated. I turned like this, and I headed
straight for the control tower. I rolled it up, and I jogged
a little bit to the right. I went by the control tower
with 90 degrees of bank and full aft stick like this,”
Rutan said, carving a tight circle with his hand. “And
you could see the guys in there and tell what kind of
glasses they were wearing. They were running around
the tower to watch me come around. And it was no big
deal because I was cleared to use my discretion. And
maybe I wasn’t that close, but the story always gets
better after more years.”
Burt looked back in the cockpit and watched his
passenger take off his badge with despair.
“He thought we were in big trouble ’cause Burt
Rutan had buzzed the control tower,” Rutan said with a
wide smile.
1.4G FPO.tif
When this photograph of Carolyn standing on the
wing of the VariViggen appeared on the cover of Sport
Aviation in August 1973, it created a huge stir. A lot
of VariViggen homebuilt plans sold, but it was the last
time Sport Aviation ever had a sexy, pinup-style cover.
30
R
E
V
McDonnell Douglas plant in St. Louis, where they had
met while Rutan worked on the F-15 for four months.
The headset in the backseat was broken, though. During
the flight, Rutan would have to shout back to keep her
appraised of the flight progress.
It was a treat to land at St. Louis International. The
airport had commercial airliners on the south side of
the field. But on the north side of the field, McDonnell
Douglas was building jet fighters. They shared the same
runway; an F-4 would be taking off with afterburners
followed by an airliner en route to some international
destination.
“There was a new, big commercial control tower,
and when I flew in, they were really blown away by the
look of this homebuilt,” Rutan said.
The VariViggen just didn’t look like any other
homebuilt at the time. After landing and taxiing up to
McDonnell Douglas, a member of the flight test team
IE
W
C
O
P
Y
1.4f.jpg
80%
Plans and Kits
Plans for the VariViggen were completed during the fall
and winter of 1973. By May of 1974, homebuilders
bought 190 sets of plans. With Rutan’s kitplane design
experience from his time at Bede, he decided to take a
unique direction for his VariViggen homebuilt. He didn’t
want to have a big company or get involved with large
inventories of parts, especially since he couldn’t afford to
spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on stocking up
the first hundred kits.
“I got with Ken Brock to have him make machine
parts and welded parts in his shop,” Rutan said. “I
Even the cockpit of the VariViggen had the look and
feel of a fighterjet. Stall resistant, high performance,
and fun to fly, the VariViggen could be built by
homebuilders from a set of plans.
31
2/3/11 2:30:33 PM
IE
27
single-engine, canard pusher
N27VV
EAA AirVenture Museum, Oshkosh, WI
homebuilders, marketed 1974
RAF
RAF
18 May 1972
Burt Rutan
two-place, tandem
19 ft
119 ft2
3.03
19.9 ft
6.2 ft
1,020 lbs
1,700 lbs
Lycoming O-320-A2A, 150 hp (4 cylinders)
tricycle, retractable
30 gal
850 ft
300 ft
800 fpm
165 mph
150 mph
300 miles
14,000 ft
Y
Above: As shown in the diagram, the yoke—or control
stick—moves the elevators on the canard for pitch
control and the ailerons on the wing for roll control.
Rudder pedals move the rudders on vertical stabilizers
for yaw control. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
1.4i.jpg
74%
Right: The word canard comes from the French
word duck. In English, it means a hoax or something
misleading. It came to be used for airplanes because as
a duck flies, its wings are closer to its tail than head,
compared to most other birds. However, the VariViggen
was not an ugly duckling and made its film debut in the
sci-fi flick Death Race 2000, with Burt Rutan as stunt
pilot for the movie. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
32
R
E
V
Model number
Type
Prototype tail number
Current prototype location
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Maximum speed
Cruise speed
Range
Ceiling
W
VariViggen Details
1.4H FPO.tif
O
P
So that was one of the smartest things that I did as
a businessman. I was sort of in the kit business, but
I didn’t have to have employees and the warehouse
and the catalog. So, I would send people there. They
would buy a VariEze kit, and I would get a small cut of
it. That’s how we survived, even though we sold a set
of plans for the VariEze at $128. And only $27 for the
VariViggen.”
The VariViggen was a challenging aircraft to build.
After all, it took Rutan four and a half years to build it
himself. Plans sold, but only a few dozen eventually took
to the air. Rutan realized that he would make only $27
on a set of plans, plus the small cut from the kits, but
would have to support the homebuilder for ten years
during the construction, followed by the support needed
to fly the completed homebuilt aircraft.
“It’s not a real good performing airplane, while it is
the most fun thing in the world to fly, pretending to be a
fighter pilot. And you can beat anybody on spot landing
contests. I decided I’m just not going to sell plans for it
anymore.”
RAF stopped selling VariViggen plans in 1978, but
builder support continued.
C
met him through EAA. He was doing gyrocopter kits.
Fred Jiran Glider Repair over here in Mojave was doing
fiberglass sailplanes. I had them build three composite
parts for the VariViggen that the homebuilders could
buy: the cowling, the nose cone—the pretty part with
the nose light in the middle, and this combing that
comes up and forms the windshield frame and the
instrument panel mount and so on.”
These curvy parts were easier to build with
fiberglass than wood. Jiran also sold these parts,
passing on a small cut. Rutan also made a deal with
Aircraft Spruce to put together the VariViggen kit. He, in
turn, sent homebuilders their way.
“They are in that business,” Rutan said. “So I just
gave them a spec showing them how much of this kind
of wood and glue and nuts and bolts and instruments
and so on.”
To help keep costs down for the homebuilders, on
his subsequent aircraft, he had Wicks Aircraft Supply
also make kits. Both kit supply companies forked over a
cut as well.
“RAF got 7 percent without having any risk of excess
inventory and without putting a lot of money up front.
33
2/3/11 2:30:33 PM
Building with
Composites
1.5.jpg
45%
Change in Course
E
V
IE
W
“I thought I’d use 85 percent of the kit. As I kept trying
to develop this idea, the plans for this MiniViggen, man,
I was down to 15 to 20 percent of the kit. A guy would
have to buy this kit and throw away most of it. That
didn’t make a whole lot of sense.”
Rutan found the construction to be challenging and
time consuming as well. The metal structure had other
drawbacks, such as heavy weight. Model testing also
revealed stability issues.
There had to be an easier way.
“I was kind of bailing on that. I decided that maybe
I can make a living selling VariViggen plans and parts.
I needed some kind of job now that I was going to quit
Bede. I didn’t want to go back to the air force. I did want
to come back to California.”
After borrowing some money from his pop, he
hopped in an old, 1946 Ercoupe he borrowed from his
uncle and flew around California, scouting for a place
where he could afford a house, a shop, and a hangar.
Bouncing from airport to airport, he touched down at
Mojave. Not only did Mojave meet his needs, Rutan was
returning to familiar territory, with Edwards only twenty
miles due southeast.
“I needed to have a hangar to put my VariViggen in,”
Rutan said. “I needed to have a shop to build this new
MiniViggen, which actually turned out to be the VariEze.
And my plan was, hey, I can’t make much money
probably on the VariViggen. It’s too hard to build. I won’t
have a lot of people, but if I make something that’s real
easy to build, I can sell hundreds of sets of plans.”
As it turned out, he would sell many more sets of
plans than that.
34
R
Not a lot of information remains about the MiniViggen, which is shown in this recent
drawing sketched by Burt Rutan in December 2009. The MiniViggen was originally
sketched in 1971, before Rutan joined Bede Aircraft. One early drawing even shows
the wingtips pointed downward. The VariViggen was already flying, but he intended
the MiniViggen to be his first homebuilt design. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
A composite is simply a combination of two or more
materials. The reason for such a combination is to take
advantage of the benefits that each individual material
has to offer.
Like the composite plywood where layers of wood
are glued together at different orientations, sheets of
fiberglass can be bonded together by epoxy to form a
very stiff composite.
Fiberglass is strong but dense. Polystyrene,
commonly known as Styrofoam or just foam, is
lightweight but not strong. Making a full-sized aircraft
entirely out of one of these materials or the other
wouldn’t be a very good idea. But by wrapping
fiberglass around foam, the resulting structure is both
strong and lightweight.
“I wandered over to the guy who was repairing the
European fiberglass sailplanes and watched him,” Rutan
said, having had his first taste of composites with the
elevator of the canard he built for the MiniViggen.
Rutan sought to learn more about this method of
construction from Fred Jiran Glider Repair. He already
had an idea that he could make a wing with composites
without the need for all kinds of specialized tooling,
which were simply molds as used in composite work.
“I watched him repair these without using the
tooling,” Rutan said. “I thought wait a minute,
maybe I can build an airplane the way he’s repairing
sailplanes and never even have a tool. I envisioned
the homebuilders would buy blocks of foam and rolls
of fiberglass from Aircraft Spruce, and nobody would
ship a tool. Let’s see if I can build this? I found to my
delight that not only was it easy to build, but I reasoned,
correctly, that it was a lot more reliable for somebody to
do this with inspection criteria that I gave than it was for
him to take 4130 steel and weld it to make a fuselage.
You make a bad weld, you die. Here, a bad part, you
could see it with fiberglass. It’s robust. It’s extra strong.”
O
P
When Rutan did start working for Bede in March of
1972, his VariViggen had not yet flown, and he didn’t tell
Bede about his idea to make the MiniViggen. The BD-5 kit
was one of Bede’s own kits after all. It was way too early
in the process to add this complication, and the distance
between this idea and the realization of it was too great.
Rutan started building parts of the MiniViggen in his
basement and garage in Newton, Kansas.
“I was going to take the BD-5 kit and have my
builders build a canard airplane,” Rutan said. “I had to
have new ribs and wing spars and everything. I decided
to build a fiberglass elevator for the canard. So my very
first thing that was composite work was to build the
elevator for the MiniViggen.”
Rutan zoomed around in his VariViggen at air shows
now that it was flying. At his day job, he worked on the
new jet version of the BD-5, the Model J. All this as he
continued to tinker with the MiniViggen. But after two
years at Bede, he decided it was time to move on.
C
A year before Jim Bede approached Burt Rutan to work
for him, Rutan had bought a BD-5 kit. Made of metal, the
small and sporty BD-5 had a single seat, straight wings,
a conventional tail, and a pusher engine. It too looked
like a mini fighter. Rutan wasn’t planning on building the
BD-5. He was planning on designing his own canard
airplane based on the BD-5. Using the same fuselage but
now a two-seater, it would have a sweptback, high-wing
configuration with fins at the wingtips.
“Laying the kit out on the floor, hey, it had landing
gear, an engine, a driveshaft, a propeller, instruments,
and rod ends for flight controls,” Rutan said. “I could use
a vast majority of the parts of this kit. I would sell a kit
myself, which were just the things that they would need
to make this MiniViggen.”
So Rutan’s first idea for an aircraft to sell was
actually the MiniViggen, not the VariViggen.
1.6b FPO.tif
Y
MiniViggen
Included in each set of plans was the basic layup procedure. With the aid of cartoons
drawn by Gary Morris, Burt and Carolyn Rutan’s first employee of RAF, this stepby-step process described the materials to use and how to go about building the
composite structure needed for Rutan’s homebuilt airplanes. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
1.6a.jpg
100%
The cross-sectional view of a wing built using composites is shown. Foam forms the
core that fills most of the inner volume, keeping the wing rigid and lightweight. To
give the wing strength, the shear web, spar cap, skin, and rear spar are made from
fiberglass plies bonded together with epoxy. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
35
2/3/11 2:30:34 PM
sequence]
1.6c.jpg
95%
Y
Winglets
When Burt Rutan gave talks about his aircraft or workshops about building with composites during the
Experimental Aviation Association’s annual air show in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, it wasn’t difficult to tell which tent he
was speaking from. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
36
1.7b.jpg
74%
they are set up so they tend to unwind the normal
rotation of the wingtip vortex,” Rutan said. “I figured that
out. And I made them part of the original VariEze POC
design. From the time I found out about them until the
first flight of the VariEze POC was only a few months. So
I was the first to fly winglets.”
However, when Whitcomb got wind of Rutan’s
application of the winglets on the VariEze POC, he was
critical and dismissed their use for light aircraft, figuring
Rutan didn’t design them correctly.
The following year, Whitcomb attended Oshkosh.
“I dragged him out to the flightline. Now, I’m
showing him the homebuilt VariEze, which has a lot
better version of the Whitcomb winglet,” Rutan said,
comparing the homebuilt VariEze (Model 33) to the
smaller VariEze POC (Model 31).
Whitcomb inspected the design, and, to his
delight, he found Rutan had built the winglets properly.
Whitcomb told Rutan he was proud to see them on
the aircraft and that Rutan was getting an additional 5
percent range with them as opposed to without them.
“I finally got his favor,” Rutan said. “That was a big
thing for me in 1976.”
Although significantly researched by general,
commercial, and military aviation in the late 1970s,
implementation had been slow, and it had taken
several decades for the use of the efficiencyimproving Whitcomb winglets to be widely adopted
by the industry.
1.7a.jpg
95%
prepress make
background white
V
IE
of subsequent layers of epoxy and fiberglass cloth are
applied in this fashion as required by the structure’s
design.
The type of foam also depended on application:
polystyrene foam in wing cores, PVC foam in fuselage
bulkheads, and urethane foam in the fuselage and fuel
tanks.
Although the use of composites would allow
Rutan to build safe, strong, affordable, and lightweight
structures, these weren’t the most attractive features
to him. Composites would allow him to build complex
shapes very simply and quickly. This, in turn, would
reduce the number of required parts. Rutan could then
get aircraft built quickly and into flight testing sooner.
Whereas the wood and aluminum VariViggen took four
and half years to complete, his next aircraft would take a
mere three and half months.
The types of composites and the methods of
fabrication did vary by some degree between Rutan’s
designs. Though he started with fiberglass and foam,
honeycomb structures and composites made with
carbon fiber were used for requirements of very high
strength and very low weight, as needed by the recordbreakers Voyager and SpaceShipOne.
R
Rutan had already hotwired wing cores out of foam
for some of his model airplanes. The hotwire process
simply uses an electrically heated wire to cut through
foam, like a hot knife through butter.
“I thought, well, I’ll try to hotwire on two-pound
foam instead of just one-pound foam,” Rutan said,
where one-pound and two-pound were just measures
of density. “Two-pound foam was this blue stuff that’s
used for flotation on docks and piers and so on. The
one-pound is made for picnic coolers and packaging
and whatever. The one-pound worked fine for model
airplanes, but I reasoned that the two-pound wouldn’t
be too heavy to do a full core wing for a VariEze.”
Known as the layup process, the shaped foam is
first coated with room-temperature curing epoxy and
then covered with a sheet of fiberglass cloth. As the
strength of a wood board varies depending on the
orientation to its grain, the strength of fiberglass cloth
depends on the orientation to its weave. After the
initial fiberglass cloth is applied, a bonding layer of
epoxy is again added and another sheet of fiberglass
cloth is placed at a specified angle that crisscrosses
the orientation of the initial fiberglass cloth. A number
E
A New Method of Construction
W
C
O
P
Inspired by the flight of soaring birds, NASA researcher
Richard Whitcomb invented the Whitcomb winglet as a
way to improve the aerodynamic efficiency of a wing.
Whitcomb termed them winglets because he wanted to
highlight their winglike, airfoil shape.
In normal flight, induced drag is generated as
high pressure air from below the wing mixes with low
pressure air from above the wing. A major source of an
aircraft’s induced drag is air flow around the wingtip
from underneath the wing to above it, resulting in a
wingtip vortex. By using a Whitcomb winglet to mitigate
this effect, Whitcomb found a 20 percent reduction in
induced drag and a 9 percent increase in the lift-to-drag
ratio. This translates directly into fuel savings.
Rutan learned of Whitcomb’s new discovery in 1974
as he designed the VariEze proof of concept (POC).
“It doesn’t put a lot of extra bending moment on the
wing, but it helps the induced drag,” Rutan said. “It’s
got to be shaped just right, and there’s a fin on the top
and a little fin on the bottom. Whitcomb had tested it in
a wind tunnel. He was hoping that someday somebody
would put it on a Learjet or an airliner. He swore that it
would give more range.”
The design for VariEze POC had already called for
vertical fins on the wingtips. By making them Whitcomb
winglets, Rutan could add some extra aerodynamic
efficiency to the aircraft.
“Looking at drawings and reading what he said
about the lift coefficients that he gets top and bottom,
Burt Rutan’s VariEze POC was the first airplane to ever
fly with the Whitcomb winglet, as shown here. These
winglets were not fins, but both the top and bottom
parts were actually airfoils, in the shape of a wing. The
winglets counteracted the drag normally created by
wingtip vortices. Rutan had the winglets even double as
rudders. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
In 1974, Burt Rutan came across new research by leading NASA aerodynamicist
Richard Whitcomb. The research showed that by using a winglet attached to the
tip of the wing of an airplane, it would reduce drag and improve range. Only a few
months away from the first flight of the VariEze POC, Rutan decided to incorporate
the winglets in his new all-composite aircraft. NASA
37
2/3/11 2:30:35 PM
VariEze POC
1.8A FPO.tif
Y
that also contained the rudders for yaw control; tandem
seating; a pusher engine; and a wide CG range due to
the canard configuration.
The VariEze POC began flying in May 1975. With
its 62-horsepower Volkswagen automotive engine,
the VariEze POC reached a top speed of more than
180 miles per hour. At cruise speed, it achieved a
fuel efficiency of more than 40 miles per gallon, and
at economy speed, it exceeded 60 miles per gallon.
These numbers encouraged Rutan to kit the aircraft.
He determined that a kit of the VariEze POC would take
350 hours to build.
O
P
The construction of both the completed VariViggen
and the unfinished MiniViggen presented problems for
Burt Rutan. These aircraft were difficult to build. Now,
however, he had figured out a method using composites
that would open up huge possibilities. Designs with
shapes too complex for practical wood and metal
fabrication could now be considered.
Rutan was convinced that by using these new
composite construction methods, with existing materials,
he could dramatically simplify the building process,
provide high performance and high efficiency, and
create a jaw-dropping, futuristic look. A homebuilder’s
dream. So he set his sights on an aircraft that could
smash existing speed and distance records for a pistonengine aircraft weighing between three hundred and five
hundred kilograms.
The design for the VariEze proof of concept (POC)
began shortly after Rutan relocated to Mojave in 1974.
A POC is a prototype that is a testbed and not likely
to be mass produced. Rutan had intended to use the
VariEze POC to research and stretch the boundaries of
construction, performance, and efficiency. It had to be
very easy to build, and that’s how the name originated.
Construction was completed in three and a half months
with the help of Gary Morris, who came by in the
evenings after working at Fred Jiran Glider Repair. Rutan
would take him to dinner afterwards. Morris later quit
his day job and got paid to work at RAF.
Features of the VariEze POC included the fiberglass
and foam composite structure; a canard with elevons
to control both the pitch and roll; high aspect-ratio,
sweptback wings; Whitcomb winglets on the main wing
By July 1975, the aircraft was ready to make its way to
EAA’s fly-in and convention. Burt Rutan and his brother
Dick Rutan, a top USAF fighter pilot, planned to go for
a world record for closed course distance at Oshkosh.
The current Class C-1a world record holder, Ed Lesher,
covered 1,554 miles flying his Teal Airplane in 1970.
Dick Rutan set out to fly to Oshkosh from Mojave
nonstop in the VariEze POC with an extra fuel tank in
the backseat while Burt Rutan flew out earlier in the
VariViggen, which had to stop for fuel along the way.
But hot engine oil temperature and low engine oil
pressure forced the VariEze POC to land before
reaching Oshkosh.
1.8c.jpg
75%
IE
W
C
First World Record
After repairs and a few days of wowing the crowds
during the air show, Dick Rutan took off in the VariEze
POC on a Saturday to break the world record. While only
on the second lap of the 182-mile circuit, the engine
blew and Dick Rutan had to make a deadstick landing
in Green Bay, Wisconsin.
“We recovered the airplane, trucked it back to
Oshkosh, and looked around the field,” Burt Rutan said.
“Here is John Monnett, who was using a Volkswagen
engine. It looked like a better one. And I asked him, ‘Do
you have any engines around?’
“He said, ‘No, I have them down in Chicago where
I live.’
“And I said, ‘I want to buy one from you.’ And
we went down there in a station wagon, bought this
engine, and brought it back up. And on the flightline at
Oshkosh, out in the open, we swapped out and put this
John Monnett engine in it.”
By Sunday, the engine had been replaced and flight
tested. On Monday morning, Dick Rutan lifted back into
the sky to push the endurance of the VariEze POC. Nine
laps and 13 hours, 8 minutes, and 45 seconds later,
he touched down and set a new world record at 1,638
miles. During the flight, the VariEze POC averaged a
fuel efficiency of 3.1 gallons per hour or 40.7 miles per
gallon while flying at an average speed of 125.5 miles
per hour.
38
First flown in 1975, the VariEze proof of concept (POC), Model 31, was an enormous
jump in design compared to the VariViggen. The use of composites allowed Burt
Rutan to build an incredibly high performing and efficient aircraft. It was named
VariEze because it was very easy to build. The name VariEze was suggested by
Rutan’s sister, Nell. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
R
The VariViggen (bottom) was mostly wood with
aluminum wings, and the MiniViggen was planned to
be all metal. Building with composites allowed Rutan
to build complex curved shapes much easier and faster
than working with wood or metal. It took Rutan four
and half years to build the VariViggen, but it took only
three and half months to build the VariEze POC (top).
E
V
1.8B FPO.tif
Prepress please
color correct
Because of the thin wing on the VariEze POC, there wasn’t much wing area to carry
all its weight. But this high wing loading made for a fast moving airplane, capable
of flying more than 180 miles per hour. Cooling for the VW engine came from a
streamline air scoop on the belly between and slightly behind the rear landing gear.
39
2/3/11 2:30:35 PM
1.8F FPO.tif
C
The VariEze POC had fixed rear landing gear and
manually retractable nose gear. This lowered the drag
and kept the weight down. The airplane parked on its
nose, kneeling on a reinforced section of the fuselage.
This helped entry into the cockpit and reduced the
need for tie down. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
1.8e.jpg
77%
O
P
Y
1.8d.jpg
64%
The Need for Improvements
E
V
IE
W
Ultimately, Burt Rutan was disappointed by the VariEze
POC’s performance. He had intended the aircraft to
have a much better range. There were other issues as
well. Early airflow separation on the canard resulted in
a high stall speed of 60 knots. And below 80 knots, the
aircraft exhibited poor roll control. It was time to return
to Mojave.
“We had only one hundred hours on the airplane,
and we had failed an engine during this record attempt,”
Rutan said. “Now flying it home with a Monnett engine,
when we got to Phoenix that engine failed.”
No doubt the VariEze POC provided plenty of
opportunities for learning and understanding.
“I am planning on kitting this airplane,” Rutan had
told everyone while at Oshkosh. “It’s going to be real low
cost. It’s got a Volkswagen engine. You won’t have to buy
an aircraft engine. Look at it. It goes 170 miles an hour,
burns only three gallons per hour. And it’s two-place.”
Rutan had already proven that he could sell plans and
put a kit together for homebuilders, and in many ways
40
R
Dick Rutan, shown seated in front with his brother Burt
Rutan in back, piloted RAF aircraft on many important
flights. Only about two months after the VariEze POC
made its first flight, he soloed it cross-country to
Oshkosh, Wisconsin, for the EAA’s air show. While
there, he broke a long-distance world record for flying
1,638 miles in a little over thirteen hours. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
the VariEze POC had proven to be an advancement and a
significant leap up from the VariViggen.
“I got home after the summer of ’75, but now I
had two engine failures. I’ve got an airplane with pretty
high wing loading for real high speed. And you know,
it isn’t as easy to fly as a Cessna or some of these little
biplanes or low-wing loading or low-stall speed things.”
With the help of Dick Eldridge at NASA’s Dryden
Flight Research Center, Rutan found that a canard
using a GU25 airfoil should replace the VariEze POC’s
existing canard, which had a GAW-1 airfoil. After the
replacement, the stall speed improved from 60 knots
to 52 knots. This switch also rectified the roll control
problem. However, Rutan could not find a suitable
engine to fit inside the VariEze POC that could replace
the unreliable Volkswagen engine.
“I got scared about people having engine failures,”
Rutan said. “So I blew the whistle on my whole plans
and said, ‘I’m going to build an airplane that will use
an aircraft engine. It will be bigger. It will have some
room for baggage at least. It will have more range. It
will be reliable. It will just be the right thing ethically to
put out to encourage people to build it and fly around
with their families.’ ”
The three “EZ” prototypes, the VariEze POC (left), Long-EZ (center), and VariEze
homebuilt (right), appear to be quite a similar. However, there were significant
differences between them in size, handling, speed, and range. The VariEze POC was
the only one of the three never offered as a homebuilt. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
VariEze POC Details
Model number
31
Type
Prototype tail number N7EZ
Current prototype location EAA AirVenture Museum, Oshkosh, WI
Customer
RAF R&D
Fabrication
RAF
Flight testing
RAF
First flight date
21 May 1975
First flight pilot
Burt Rutan
Seating
two-place, tandem
Wingspan
21 ft
Wing area
59 ft2 (canard and main wing)
Length
12.4 ft
Empty weight
399 lbs
Gross weight
880 lbs
Engine
Volkswagen 1,834 cc, 62 hp
Landing gear
tricycle, retractable nose gear & fixed main gear
Fuel capacity
14 gal
Takeoff distance
700 ft
Landing distance
1,100 ft
Rate of climb
1,100 fpm (gross weight)
Max cruise speed
173 mph (gross weight)
Range
780 miles (gross weight, 40% power)
Ceiling
14,000 ft (gross weight)
41
2/3/11 2:30:36 PM
1.9A FPO.tif
Y
A New Pair of Wings
O
P
1.9c.jpg
81%
VariViggen SP
42
R
E
V
“Here I was building—I don’t know how I had this much
time—I was building the VariEze POC. Hadn’t flown
yet,” Burt Rutan said. “And I thought, ‘I built the wings
on the VariViggen out of metal just because I wanted to
learn how to build with metal.’ It was a wooden airplane
with metal wings. It made no sense. But that’s the way
it always flew. I figured out that just by stretching the
wings a few feet on each side, but making the sweep
different, I could make it balance and have the same
controllability. It would have a higher aspect ratio. It
would perform better at altitude, have longer-range, and
in these outer wings I would put fuel tanks.”
The VariViggen had a single, gravity-fed fuel tank
behind the passenger seat and above the baggage
compartment. The tank’s capacity was thirty gallons, of
which five gallons were reserve, giving the aircraft a range
of three hundred miles. This had been too short for Rutan.
To get around this, while still at Bede, he took a propeller
spinner without the propeller cutouts and attached it to a
sheetmetal cylinder fashioned out of aluminum.
1.9b.jpg
43%
IE
With a new method of construction available to Burt
Rutan, he revisited his first airplane, the VariViggen
(Model 27). He eliminated all aluminum construction
from the aircraft by redesigning the wing and rudder
out of foam and fiberglass. This new design, Model
32-SP, was called the VariViggen Special Performance
(SP). Courtesy of Burt Rutan
W
C
By also taking advantage of lessons learned from
building and flying the VariEze POC, Burt Rutan
improved some of the VariViggen’s features by designing
a retrofittable special performance wing. The gross
weight of the VariViggen SP did not change because
the use of lightweight composites allowed it to carry an
additional 18 gallons of fuel. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
These planform and head-on views show how the
aluminum wing of the VariViggen was redesigned for
the VariViggen SP. With the use of composites, Burt
Rutan also changed the flat bottom wing to a more
aerodynamically sound contoured shape as well as
added a Whitcomb winglet. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
“We were building BD-5s, so we knew how to do
aluminum,” Rutan said. “I made something that looked
like a bomb. It held twelve gallons of gas, and I had
a little pump in it that pumped up into the other tank.
Made a world of difference because you have a certain
amount of unusable fuel, in other words, reserve fuel. If
you add twelve gallons, you still have the reserve fuel.
So I added like 50 percent to the range by just putting
this twelve-gallon tank on. And it looked cool. It was my
fighter. It had a centerline bomb. I flew almost all the
time with that bomb on it.”
Remember the good old days when you could fly
around with something that resembled a bomb strapped
to the belly of your airplane? Decades later Mike Melvill
encountered trouble in White Knight while delivering
SpaceShipOne to the Smithsonian’s National Air &
Space Museum. SpaceShipOne had looked too much
like ordnance as well, which caused a stir on the ground
as he tried to land in Washington, D.C.
Although the centerline fuel tank extended the range
to 450 miles, Rutan never made a homebuilders version
of it.
Fabricated using fiberglass and foam and then first flown
on 16 July 1975, a month after the first flight of the
VariEze POC, the VariViggen special performance (SP)
wings simply swapped places with the detachable, outer
metal wings. With the SP wings in place and no other
modifications, the VariViggen was then designated as
the Model 32-SP. The gross weight didn’t change, even
though the composite construction was much lighter.
The SP wings took advantage of Whitcomb winglets,
which were first used on the VariEze POC, and had
built-in fuel tanks that each contained nine gallons.
“It wasn’t as much fun to fly as it had smaller
ailerons,” Rutan said. “It didn’t have that real zippy
roll rate. But it had a little flatter approach with longer
wings. It had a better glide. And it had maybe 5 or 8
percent more range. If you go up real high, it would
perform better, maybe get another 10 percent up real
high. Of course, you didn’t go very high in a VariViggen.
It pretty much wouldn’t climb well if you get above all
eleven thousand feet or so.”
The stall characteristics with the SP wings also
changed. Not for the better. With the standard wings,
the VariViggen was “stall proof,” but with the SP wings,
it behaved more like a conventional light aircraft. This
fact may have been a step backward, but, overall, the
VariViggen matured to a more practical aircraft. True it
didn’t roll as fast, but it did climb and cruise faster.
With the boost from the more efficient wing design
and the extra eighteen gallons of fuel, the maximum
range of the VariViggen now increased to more than six
hundred miles.
Rutan sold plans for the SP wings before selling
plans for the VariEze homebuilt. Unlike when Rutan
built the VariViggen, this time he knew from the start
that he wanted to sell plans for the SP wings. He did
a much better job of photographing and documenting
the construction. The plans now included templates
that homebuilders used to hotwire carve the foam wing
cores. Two crossed layers of unidirectional fiberglass
cloth were required for the skin. Compared to the metal
wings, the SP wings took a third of the time to build.
VariViggen Wing Comparison
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Gross weight
Rate of climb
Cruise speed
Range
Standard Wing
(Model 27)
19 ft
119 ft2
3.03
1,700 lbs
800 fpm
150 mph
300 miles
SP Wing
(Model 32-SP)
23.7 ft
125 ft2
4.47
1,700 lbs
1,000 fpm
158 mph
600 miles
43
2/3/11 2:30:37 PM
VariEze Homebuilt
Y
1.10a.jpg
82%
C
O
P
Up to this point, Burt Rutan had designed, built, and
flown the VariViggen (Model 27 and Model 32-SP) and
the VariEze POC (Model 31). As of January 1975, an
estimated 150 VariViggens were under construction.
Many of them would remain unfinished because of
the aircraft’s complexity, though. His new composite
construction method seemed to solve that problem with
the VariEze POC. However, from the experience Rutan
gained from these two aircraft, he felt the performance
of the VariEze POC was inadequate to develop into an
aircraft for homebuilders. So Rutan focused his efforts
on the bigger and better VariEze homebuilt.
At first glance, the VariEze POC and the VariEze
homebuilt look to be the same aircraft, but that is about
where the similarities end. Rutan outlined his design
philosophy for his new airplane in an article he wrote for
Sport Aviation in January 1976. He stated:
Every aircraft is designed by a series of compromises
to fit a list of requirements. In the design of the homebuilt
VariEze, I specified two place plus baggage and a
cruising range of over 800 miles. I then listed the order of
priority of the remaining requirements as follows:
W
1.10B FPO.tif
1. Efficient cruise at a relatively high speed.
2. Simplicity of construction obtained by few number
of parts.
3. Low maintenance requirements of systems
and structure.
4. High structural life and system reliability.
5. Flying qualities optimized for low fatigue on cross
country flights.
6. Cockpit comfort.
7. Good riding qualities in turbulence.
8. Low cost.
9. Light weight for good climb performance.
10. Ease of disassembly for trailering.
11. Low stall speed.
12. Short takeoff/landing distance.
13. Aerobatic capability.
14. Soft/rough field capability.
This is not to say that the last few items were
ignored completely, but they were not optimized at the
expense of the first few items.
1.10c.jpg
75%
44
R
E
V
IE
The VariEze homebuilt (Model 33) was the first aircraft to hit the homebuilt market
from Burt Rutan where his original intention—from start to finish—was to design an
aircraft specifically for homebuilders that would be very easy to build and have great
performance. A major difference between the larger homebuilt as compared to the
POC was the use of a certified aircraft engine that replaced the modified Volkswagen
engine, which was prone to failure and could lead to accidents. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
During the flight testing phase, to improve yaw control,
an experimental rhino rudder was attached to the nose
of the VariEze homebuilt. While effective, it did sit
directly in front of the pilot’s forward view. The idea
was nixed, and the rudders stayed put in the winglets.
Using the VariEze POC as a baseline, longer range was
a major design requirement for the VariEze homebuilt.
It had a range of 1,050 miles, which was 270 miles
greater than that of the VariEze POC.
45
2/3/11 2:30:38 PM
1.10e.jpg
75%
Below: Built around a bigger and more powerful
Continental aircraft engine as opposed to a Volkswagen
automotive engine, the VariEze homebuilt (bottom)
was longer by 1.8 feet, had a wingspan wider by 1.2
feet, and a gross weight 170 pounds heavier than the
VariEze POC (top). Courtesy of Burt Rutan
1.10f.pdf
100%
46
R
E
V
IE
1.10D FPO.tif
Never one to shy away from new technology, in the
April 1977 issue of Canard Pusher, Burt Rutan included
a short description and a sketch of a solar-powered
electrical system for the VariEze homebuilt that he
would soon be testing. A rectangular bank of solar cells
can be seen directly in front of Rutan in the photo.
O
P
C
If an aircraft is said to be easy to build, well, that is
really a relative thing. Not many people would actually
ever attempt such a feat in the first place. An aircraft
designer with all the information in his or her head about
a shiny new prototype must be able to communicate
the assembly process to the would-be homebuilders so
there isn’t a whole bunch of leftover nuts and bolts next
to a squirrelly constructed airplane. Most everyone has
experienced the frustration of trying to put something
together with a lousy set of instructions.
Rutan realized that his plans for the VariViggen
were not ideal. Kitting the VariViggen was, after all, an
afterthought. By designing the VariViggen SP wings, he
also got to practice making much more effective plans
and took this learning straight into drawing up the plans
for the VariEze homebuilt.
“It was a different deal once I learned more about
the business,” Rutan said. “My new plans were based
on the Simplicity dress patterns used to make dresses. If
you get a Simplicity dress pattern, there are a few words
and a sketch and then a few more words and another
sketch. Each sketch shows you graphically what that
paragraph tells you to do.”
Y
All Dressed Up
W
After scrutinizing this ambitious list of design criteria,
Rutan developed the revolutionary VariEze homebuilt.
With its performance, flying qualities, stall resistance,
affordability, and ease of construction, nothing at the
time could come close to matching it in the air. Even
today, as of 2010, VariEze homebuilts hold several
distance and speed world records.
The sleek surface finish of the VariEze, which
produced very little air resistance, and the highly
aerodynamic shape made for one hot aircraft. With its
100–horsepower engine, carrying limited fuel and no
passenger, it hit a speed of 200 miles per hour. An
altitude of 25,300 feet had also been reached. Klaus
Savier currently holds a world speed record of 203.4
miles per hour in his VariEze.
Unlike the VariEze POC, which had elevons on
its canard to control both roll and pitch, the VariEze
homebuilt required separate ailerons on the main
wing for proper roll control. Elevators on its canard
were used for pitch. The ailerons and elevators were
controlled with a joystick on the right side of the
cockpit. Rudders were mounted in the Whitcomb
winglets, and only the front-seater had rudder pedals
to control them.
Unlike the VariEze POC that had elevons on its canard
to control both pitch and roll, the VariEze homebuilt,
shown here, had elevators on its canard to control pitch
and ailerons on its wing to control roll. Both VariEze
types had rudders as part of their winglets, though.
47
2/3/11 2:30:39 PM
O
P
1.10g.jpg
78%
E
V
IE
W
C
On the Road
R
All Burt Rutan supplied were plans to make his VariEze homebuilt. Individuals who
purchased the plans built their own airplanes and then flew them. After Rutan
introduced the plans in Oshkosh 1976, in 1977 there were five VariEzes at Oshkosh.
In 1978, there were twenty-four and in 1979 forty-one. EAA even assigned a special
area to park for those who made the annual trip to Oshkosh in their VariEzes and
Long-EZs, which would soon follow. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
48
also could install a new or used engine. Not only was
the VariEze cheap to build, it was cheap to operate
and maintain.
The plans went on sale in July 1976. A year later, five
VariEzes made the pilgrimage to Oshkosh. In 1978, there
were twenty-four, and in 1979 there were forty-one.
Although not unexpected because of the different
skill level each homebuilder had, there was a disparity
in performance between their aircraft. For such an
aerodynamically clean aircraft, small variations in the
surfaces that were exposed to the airstream could have
large effects on performance. One survey conducted
by Rutan revealed the average VariEze performance
was twelve miles per hour less than expected. Many
homebuilders couldn’t fight the urge to pack in extra
equipment and instrumentation as well. Designed to be
a lightweight aircraft, these additions caused weight gain
that substantially decreased the useable payload.
Homebuilders did, however, play an important
role in shaking out the design. As they encountered
problems, Rutan quickly began investigating, made the
necessary modifications, and sent out alerts in Canard
Pusher. By 1980, homebuilders purchased more than
three thousand sets of plans at $128 a pop, and a
squadron of more than two hundred VariEzes had taken
to the skies all around the world.
Y
The common practice during those days was to
provide a big roll of blueprints and a set of instructions.
However, Rutan’s plans now consisted of five sections:
a 1-inch-thick, 11- by 17-inch manufacturing manual,
engine installation manual, finishing instructions,
owner’s manual, and optional electrical instructions.
The RAF’s quarterly newsletter Canard Pusher, originally
called VariViggen News, updated the homebuilders on
plans changes and gave helpful building hints.
“You show them only what they need to know for
what they’re doing today or tonight,” Rutan said.
So the format of the plans for making his VariEze
and subsequent homebuilt airplanes was based on the
plans for making dresses. It didn’t take a homebuilder
to be an expert craftsman, and someone with a good
set of hands could build a VariEze in six hundred to
one thousand hours. This style of plans became widely
emulated by other homebuilt aircraft designers.
Nowadays the use of composites is widespread. Look
no further than modern houses, bicycles, tennis rackets,
skies, or fishing poles. But in the 1970s, composites
were still a mystery material to many. Homebuilders
initially approached Rutan’s composite-building method
with some trepidation. Rightfully so. Flying well over one
hundred miles per hour at five thousand feet is a terrible
place for homebuilders to learn that they jumped into
something that they didn’t fully understand.
Rutan decided it was up to him to teach people
how to build with composites. Once people understood
composites and felt comfortable building with
composites, people could then get to work building his
futuristic little airplane.
“I took trips to France, England, Netherlands,
Germany, Australia, New Zealand, and all over the
United States,” Rutan said. “I brought along materials
to show people how to hotwire, how to do fiberglass
layups, how to do knife trims, how to do sanding for
bonding, and all the processes.”
He ran forums at Oshkosh and weekly Saturday
demonstrations from his shop in Mojave.
“I thought I had to show people. I thought if I could
teach thousands of people to do this, then there would
be enough people around that they could help to teach
others locally. And this process of building airplanes,
which was brand new, would then spread educationally.
It would support the plans sales that looked like were
going to happen. This was the big thing and was so
important to the success of the VariEze.”
In the Hands of Homebuilders
In the late 1970s, to assemble a VariEze would cost
between five thousand and nine thousand dollars.
Homebuilders had the option of building mostly from
scratch or buying a bunch of prefabricated parts. They
VariEze Homebuilt Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Max cruise speed
Range
Ceiling
33
N4EZ
National Air & Space Museum, Washington, D.C.
RAF
RAF
14 March 1976
Burt Rutan
two-place, tandem
22.2 ft
66.6 ft2 (canard and main wing)
14.2 ft
4.9 ft
585 lbs
1,050 lbs
Continental O-200, 100 hp (4 cylinders)
28 gal
860 ft (gross weight)
193 mph (gross weight)
1,050 miles (gross weight, 40% power)
49
2/3/11 2:30:40 PM
Y
Chapter 2
O
P
2.0 FPO.tif
V
IE
W
C
Continues to Soar
50
R
E
This photograph from Oshkosh in 1982 shows nine original Rutan types and two
derivatives (Gemini and Cozy). All from left to right: in the front row, Solitaire, Grizzly,
and Gemini; in the middle row, AMSOIL Biplane Racer, AD-1, VariEze homebuilt, and
Quickie; and in the back row, Cozy, VariViggen, Defiant, and Long-EZ. The Gemini was
a two-place twin based on the four-place twin Defiant, and the Cozy was a side-byside seater based on the tandem seater Long-EZ. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
In June 1974, Burt Rutan had settled back in California, deciding to go solo and set up shop
in a wooden World War II barracks at Mojave Airport. And within two years, he had the
VariEze POC and VariEze homebuilt flying.
Rutan had founded the Rutan Aircraft Factory, which
was originally called the Rutan Aircraft Company, back
in 1969 while he worked at Edwards Air Force Base and
built his first airplane, the VariViggen, in his spare time.
RAF sold a couple of VariViggen plans a week, but
after the VariEze homebuilt flew to Oshkosh in July 1976
and its plans hit the market, business lifted way off.
“People had been waiting to buy them for months,
and I did not accept advance orders. The first day I sold
one hundred sets. A guy flew in from San Diego and
bought about twenty sets for him plus his friends. And
they cost $139. Well, one hundred times one hundred
is ten thousand dollars—in a day. Wow, pretty darn
good return.” Rutan said. “That year I took home six
thousand bucks for the family. We didn’t buy a new car
or anything. You could live on six thousand bucks in
Mojave in ’76. I put the rest in the bank, so we could
build another airplane and grow the company.”
When Rutan looked back, he felt that his flight test
experience for the air force was crucial to learning how
to efficiently analyze and take risks as he developed his
own designs. His subsequent exposure working for Bede
gave him insight into the business side of aviation. Now,
on average, every year one new type of airplane rolled
out of Rutan’s hangar and took off.
“A lot of these airplanes were done just because I
was pissed off at some critique,” Rutan half admitted
with a smile. “And I thought, ‘Well, let’s see if this guy
is right.’” This was certainly the case when someone
said that he couldn’t get a low landing speed with a
canard—then came Grizzly.
That was exactly the spirit Rutan charged
through aviation with. And as he did so, Rutan’s
design and fabrication work received notice from
more than homebuilders.
Aside from doing his own new aircraft, such as
the Defiant and Long-EZ, he was being asked to help
design and fabricate aircraft for others, such as Quickie
and AD-1. Some projects took longer to go from first
concept to first flight. The AD-1, for example, was
Model 35, but it made its maiden flight after those of
the Defiant (Model 40), Quickie (Model 54), and
Long-EZ (Model 61).
In 1977, RAF expanded into a new building and
growth continued.
“Mike Melvill came on board in 1978. He helped
me finish the Defiant. I was building the sump tanks for
the Defiant. I wasn’t finished with this twin. He helped
me finish it. He had already built a VariViggen. His big
job was to do builder support, but he couldn’t do builder
support on the VariEze because he never built one. So I
immediately had him build his own airplane.”
RAF sold approximately fourteen thousand sets
of plans. With all those builders out there who had
either finished, started, or not yet begun building their
airplanes, it was necessary for Rutan to disseminate
important information to them, such as plan updates,
building techniques, and safety warnings. Started
in May 1974 as VariViggen News, RAF’s quarterly
newsletter was renamed after five issues to Canard
Pusher to better reflect its coverage of a whole fleet
of designs.
51
2/3/11 2:30:40 PM
sequence]
2.3C FPO.tif
R
O
P
E
V
IE
2.3A FPO.tif
C
From the side, the aircraft looked like a biplane
with the bottom wing pushed forward and the top wing
pushed backward. This configuration is more commonly
know as a tandem wing or stagger wing. To improve
stability, the top wing canted up and the bottom wing
canted down.
The full-span elevators were mounted on the
bottom wing, and the front landing gear was housed
in its wingtips. Inboard ailerons on the top wing
controlled the roll. The tail fin was fixed for directional
stability, but the small rudder, mounted to the tail
wheel, provided yaw control.
Using the same composite building method, the
Quickie weighed half as much as the VariEze, an
incredible 240 pounds empty, and it took two-thirds
of the time, materials, and cost to construct. At a
maximum cruise speed of 121 miles per hour, it had
a fuel efficiency of 80 miles per gallon, but it hit 100
miles per gallon when the speed dropped down to its
efficiency cruise speed.
After Rutan, Jewett, and Sheehan had finalized the
design and the Quickie was built, Rutan completed the
flight testing and then turned the aircraft over to Jewett
and Sheehan’s Quickie Aircraft Corporation to begin
selling kits. The Quickie was the first aircraft to take flight
that was contracted by a customer for design by Rutan.
W
“When the development of a new homebuilt aircraft is
undertaken, it is often closely followed by the public,
and can even be viewed on static display at fly-ins
and air shows during its construction period, at which
time its performance and cost estimates are echoed
by the developers,” reported Burt Rutan, Tom Jewett,
and Gene Sheehan in Sport Aviation. “This is not the
policy of our little skunk works at the Mojave Airport.
The development of the Quickie has been one of the
best kept secrets of aviation. Until its first flight on
November 15, 1977, its existence was known only to a
handful of people.”
In 1975, Jewett and Sheehan started searching for
a small and reliable engine that they wanted to build a
single-place kit aircraft around. They wanted the aircraft
to be very enjoyable and economical. They chose an
Onan engine that was actually used to provide electricity
for mobile homes.
Jewett and Sheehan turned to Rutan for the
preliminary design in May 1977. The first concept,
Model 49, looked like a miniature VariEze, but the
configuration didn’t work aerodynamically. The final
design, Model 54, solved those problems. Head-on,
the Quickie looked like the X-wing starfighter from Star
Wars, which just so happened to have its silver screen
release that same month.
Y
Quickie
Tom Jewett, a former coworker of Burt Rutan’s at Bede Aircraft, and Gene Sheehan approached Rutan to help design a superefficient, zippy,
single-place aircraft. Phenomenally lightweight, the Quickie had an empty weight of 240 pounds but could fit a six-and-a-half-foot-tall,
215-pound person inside. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
52
Quickie Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Maximum speed
Cruise speed
Range
Ceiling
54
single-engine, tandem-wing
N77Q
The Museum of Flight, Seattle, WA
Quickie Aircraft Corporation
RAF
RAF
17 November 1977
Burt Rutan
single-place
16.7 ft
53 ft2
17.3 ft
4 ft
240 lbs
480 lbs
Onan, 22 hp
conventional, fixed
8 gal
660 ft
835 ft
425 fpm
127 mph
121 mph
550 miles
12,300 ft
The Quickie had full-span elevators on its bottom wing
and inboard ailerons on its top wing. Originally, as
shown here, the vertical stabilizer was fixed and the tail
wheel pant, at the way back, contained the rudder. A
subsequent modification enlarged the vertical stabilizer
and included the rudder in it. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
2.3B FPO.tif
The tandem-wing Quickie was somewhat of a cross
between a canard aircraft and a biplane. The top wing
canted slightly upward and the bottom wing canted
slightly downward, making it also look like an X-wing
starfighter head-on. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
53
2/3/11 2:30:40 PM
2.4C FPO.tif
Y
O
P
2.4B FPO.tif
R
As if a airplane made of composites with a canard, sweptback wings, winglets, and
a pusher engine wasn’t enough to excite crowds at Oshkosh in 1979, the Defiant
capped it off with an engine in its nose as well. Note its winglet rising above the
people and behind it, the winglets of the prototype Long-EZ, which got a major
revision before plans were sold. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
54
The Homebuilt Defiant
C
W
When the canard really gets too big, as with the tandem-wing Defiant, it is more of
a wing. But it still provides stall resistance. And by building the twin-engine airplane
with push-pull engines, Burt Rutan was able to make a much safer flying aircraft
during a single-engine failure compared to other twins. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
E
For long-range, night, and bad-weather flying,
twin-engine aircraft have an obvious advantage in the
event of an engine failure compared to single-engine
aircraft. However, twins can still get into trouble if
one of the two engines fails. In this situation, the pilot
must immediately compensate for the huge forces that
develop from the asymmetry of having one engine
generating thrust on one wing and the other engine
generating drag on the other wing. This is especially
dangerous on takeoff.
Rutan wanted a workhorse, so he took advantage
of twin engines in a push-pull configuration. In RAF’s
newsletter, Canard Pusher, he described his “noprocedure-for-engine failure” design goal for the Defiant:
“It doesn’t take a lot of study to realize the impact on
flight safety of a twin that not only has no appreciable
trim change at engine failure, but requires no pilot action
when it does fail. You can fail an engine at rotation
for takeoff or during a go around in the landing flare.
The pilot does nothing; he climbs out as if nothing
happened. He has no prop controls to identify and
feather. He has no cowl flaps to open, no wing flaps to
raise, no min control speed to monitor (he can climb
better than the other light twins even if he slows to
the stall speed), no retrimming is required, he can
even leave the gear down with only a 50 fpm climb
penalty. The only single-engine procedures are the long
term ones: (1) cross feed if you want to use all fuel on
operative engine, (2) magnetos off.”
Encouraged by the performance, Rutan decided to
type-certify an aircraft based on the Defiant in 1979.
To this point, all of his designs were for homebuilders.
Now he hoped a pilot could go out and buy a completed
Defiant instead of buying a twin from Beech, Cessna,
or Piper. However, Rutan could not secure funding for
the program. Since there was no shortage of projects
running at RAF, Rutan shifted his focus away from
developing the Defiant further. He still amassed more
piloting time flying this aircraft than he did flying any
other type of aircraft.
2.4a.jpg
78%
IE
“I wasn’t planning on kitting the Defiant when I built it.
I built it for me,” Rutan said, similarly to the intent of the
VariViggen. “I wanted a twin. I wanted something that
I would be comfortable in at night. And I wanted big
baggage. I wanted a four-place,” Rutan said.
V
Defiant
Burt Rutan enlisted the help of expert homebuilder Fred Keller to take charge of
developing a kit plan for the Defiant. Shown in front of the original Defiant (Model
40), Keller’s Defiant homebuilt (Model 74) had larger wing-root strakes, wingspan,
and winglets. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
Defiant Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engines
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Rate of climb
Cruise speed
Range
Ceiling
40
twin-engine, push-pull, tandem-wing
N78RA
Hiller Aviation Museum, San Carlos, CA
RAF
RAF
30 June 1978
Burt Rutan
four-place
29.2 ft
127.3 ft2
1,585 lbs
2,900 lbs
two Lycoming O-320s, 160 hp each
90.5 gal
217 mph (65% power)
1,290 miles
28,350 ft
In 1981, Rutan approached Alaskan Fred Keller, a
grand champion winner at Oshkosh for the VariEze he
built, to construct an improved version of the Defiant
for homebuilders. Having a twin-engine in the rugged
country of Alaska, not to mention developing a kit for
Rutan, had very strong appeal for Keller.
Keller meticulously documented the building
process. He would also be providing building support for
the Defiant homebuilt.
Both wings now had greater spans, and the strakes
at the rear wing roots were enlarged. Changes to the
winglets and ailerons improved the Defiant homebuilt’s
flying qualities and performance. Modifications to the
cockpit also afforded more room and comfort to the
occupants. Like the prototype, it had two independent
electrical systems and two independent fuel systems.
In 1983, the cost for a homebuilder to build it, without
avionics, was twenty thousand to thirty thousand
dollars, requiring approximately 2,000 to 2,500 hours
of labor for the construction.
The homebuilt Defiant, Model 74, tail number
N39199, made its maiden flight on 16 July 1983,
flown by Rutan and Keller. During this flight, however,
Rutan noticed it wasn’t climbing as fast as it should. The
carburetor float stuck for one of the engines. They hadn’t
even realized they were flying along on just a single
engine. The homebuilt Defiant’s design proved its safety
for an engine failure on the very first flight.
“The plans were put out in ’84, and we closed up
plan sales in ’85,” Rutan said. “So the Defiant plans
were only sold for one year. Something like one hundred
sets of plans in one year. And that’s all.”
Only a handful of this amazing aircraft ever got off
the ground.
55
2/3/11 2:30:41 PM
sequence]
Long-EZ
E
V
IE
2.5B FPO.tif
56
R
The last of the “EZ” trilogy, the Long-EZ had a cruising speed of 184 miles per
hour, which was 9 miles per hour slower than that of the cruising speed of the
VariEze homebuilt, but the Long-EZ more than made up for it by having a range of
1,970 miles, which was nearly double the range of the VariEze homebuilt. Courtesy
of Burt Rutan
A continued refinement of a now familiar configuration,
the design of the Long-EZ provided better handling for a
more docile flying aircraft. Bigger overall, the Long-EZ’s
length, wingspan, and gross weight compared to the
VariEze homebuilt were greater by 2.6 feet, 3.9 feet, and
275 pounds, respectively. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
2.5C FPO.tif
O
P
Y
called a rhino rudder. The pilot could see on either side,
but if deflected, it obstructed the view.
“Now it had real big fuel strakes. That’s where the
fifty gallons came from,” Rutan said. “And I scaled up
the fuselage. Anyway, it was VariEze wings, VariEze
canard, and made a little bit better.”
In 1979, RAF flew the prototype to Oshkosh. The
aircraft was far from having the design locked down,
though. It was a terrible flying aircraft, and Rutan was
very disappointed. He knew it wasn’t something he
could kit.
“I still told everybody, I said, ‘Listen, I’m going to
make this thing fly better. Make it fly really good. And
I’m going to have plans for a long-range airplane.’ That
promise was made at Oshkosh ’79,” Rutan said. “By
Oshkosh ’80, we had the Long-EZ there at Oshkosh,
and we had plans for it.”
W
Not too long after the VariEze homebuilt hit the market
in 1976, Burt Rutan recognized the huge benefit of
having much greater range for the aircraft. He began
sketching out ideas to take advantage of a heavier and
more powerful Lycoming engine. He initially called the
new design the SuperEze.
“I showed that, hey, I can make an airplane with
almost the same cruise speed, but it could go a couple
thousand miles,” Rutan said. “It would be a real safety
thing to have, go around weather and whatever. And
I was having trouble with people getting Continental
engines. We were running out of them. Everyone had to
buy a used engine.”
When the long-range Longhorn Learjet came out,
the first Learjet with winglets, Rutan liked the name,
so he thought Long-EZ would be a great name for an
aircraft with a range of around two thousand miles.
“I was kind of enamored by having something
with fifty gallons of gas, and you just fill ’er up and go
anywhere,” Rutan said.
He wanted to design an airplane with more forgiving,
easier to fly, and safer flying qualities. He even simplified
the flight controls by using a small rudder on the nose
RAF’s Most Successful Homebuilt
C
2.5A FPO.tif
Dozens of modifications had been evaluated as the
design refined step by step. Compared to the smaller
VariEze, the Long-EZ had less sweep in the wings as
well as less wing loading, which is just the aircraft
weight divided by its wing area. Improved fabrication
methods developed on the Defiant allowed for a
41 percent increase in wing area with only a small
corresponding increase in weight.
The Long-EZ had slower landing speeds than the
VariEze. Coming in on final approach was flatter, so
the pilot didn’t have any trouble seeing over the nose
during landing. The stall speed was lower, too. The
large winglets provided better directional stability, and
the rhino rudder on the nose was abandoned in favor of
winglet rudders.
“It was just safer and had more docile flying
qualities,” Rutan said. “It wouldn’t go as fast for the
same horsepower. It was a bigger airplane.”
On 15 December 1979, Dick Rutan set a closed
course world record, flying the Long-EZ, with an extra
fuel tank in the back seat area, 4,800 miles nonstop.
He flew for 33 hours and 34 minutes, averaging 145.7
miles per hour and 35 miles per gallon. On a separate,
lightweight flight, he reached an altitude of 26,900 feet.
The typical Long-EZ pilot, though, could expect
an economy cruise flying at twelve thousand feet, 144
miles per hour, and 3.52 gallons per hour. Stall-proof,
the aircraft would climb at nine hundred feet per minute
while at full aft stick.
“The Long-EZ is probably the best homebuilt that we
did,” Rutan said. “And I think it has probably the largest
numbers of my designs that have been built.”
First flown in 1979, the Long-EZ became Burt Rutan’s best-selling homebuilt design.
Having dialed in the balance between high performance and flying qualities, the
Long-EZ gave a more comfortable ride over a longer distance compared to its “EZ”
predecessors. This pair of Long-EZ’s fly in tight formation amidst the low clouds.
Long-EZ Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Cruise speed
Range
Ceiling
61
N79RA
prototype disassembled
RAF
RAF
13 June 1979
Dick Rutan
two-place, tandem
26.1 ft
94.8 ft2 (including canard)
16.8 ft
7.9 ft
750 lbs
1,325 lbs
Lycoming O-235, 108 hp
52 gal
184 mph (75% power)
1,970 miles (gross weight, 40% power)
57
2/3/11 2:30:41 PM
2.6A FPO.tif
2.6c.jpg
82%
O
P
In the early 1970s, the oblique or skew wing aircraft
concept that NASA researcher Robert Jones invented
in the mid-1940s got a good, hard second look. Jones
had envisioned an aircraft that could pivot its wing, like
the opening and closing of a pair of scissors, to make
dramatic changes in flight performance. His calculations
showed an aircraft would use half the fuel at one
thousand miles per hour with the wing skewed at 60
degrees compared to an unskewed wing.
IE
W
C
Now NASA looked to apply this concept to a highspeed airliner capable of flying Mach 1.4. The entire
wing would start off perpendicular to the fuselage,
like conventional aircraft, for low-speed flight during
taking off and landing. For high speed, the entire wing
would pivot around a connection point on top of the
fuselage, angling one wingtip forward and the other
wingtip backward. In the skew position, the drag would
decrease, but both speed and range would increase.
Major aerospace companies wanted in, but NASA
couldn’t fund a very expensive research program. In
1975, two of Burt Rutan’s college friends–one worked at
Edwards Air Force Base and the other worked at NASA
Dryden–approached him with an idea. “We’ve noticed
that you built a VariEze in three months. Why don’t you
design for us an airplane with a skew wing?” Rutan said
about them approaching him. “They noticed that I also
did the jet version of the BD-5.”
Rutan was still flight testing the VariEze at the time
and hadn’t yet started design on the Defiant. But he
partnered up with Herb Iversen at Ames Industrial
Corporation of Long Island, New York, the providers
of the jet engine used in the BD-5J. NASA Ames and
NASA Dryden also partnered for the research project.
Above: The AD-1 was a technology demonstrator of
a concept for NASA Ames and NASA Dryden. The
concept was to have the wing perpendicular to the
fuselage, like a normal airplane, to give the aircraft the
lift needed for takeoffs and landings. However, in flight
it would rotate the entire wing, skewing it to reduce
drag. In this asymmetric configuration, cruise speed
would be significantly improved. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
V
2.6b.jpg
77%
R
E
Left: Burt Rutan and Ames Industrial of Long Island,
New York, teamed together to build the AD-1 for NASA.
At 15 percent scale, the single-person aircraft was a
technology demonstrator for a much larger futuristic,
supersonic transport jet. NASA
58
Y
AD-1
The flight characteristics of the oblique-wing, or scissorwing, of the AD-1 were evaluated over a range of wing
angles. An electric motor in the aircraft would rotate
the entire wing in flight, as a single piece, from a
position perpendicular to the fuselage, 0 degrees, to a
maximum of 60 degrees. NASA
The Ames-Dryden-1 (AD-1), or Rutan’s Model 35,
was a 15 percent–scale version of a Boeing transonic
airliner concept. Built using the same fiberglass and
foam composite method as the VariEze and designed
for study only at low airspeeds, the AD-1 had an
electrically actuated wing that pivoted to a maximum
skew of 60 degrees.
After seventy-nine flights total, the AD-1 completed
all its technical objectives. It exhibited satisfactory flight
characteristics at skew angles of 0 degrees and 30
degrees, but, as expected, the flying qualities declined
from 30 degrees to 45 degrees due to aeroelasticity and
pitch-trim coupling. From 45 degrees to 60 degrees of
skew, the handling was poor, but the pilot could still
compensate for the asymmetries. The AD-1 did not have
flight control augmentation or mixing, which would have
been used to compensate for these effects.
AD-1 Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engines
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Maximum speed
Ceiling
35
twin-jet, skew wing research aircraft
N805NA
Hiller Aviation Museum, San Carlos, CA
NASA
Ames Industrial Corporation
NASA
21 December 1979
Thomas McMurtry
single-place
32.3 ft (unswept)
93 ft2
38.8 ft
6.75 ft
1,450 lbs
2,145 lbs
two Microturbo TRS18-046 turbojet engines,
220 lbs thrust each
tricycle, fixed
80 gal
200 mph
12,000 ft
59
2/3/11 2:30:42 PM
O
P
C
E
V
IE
Mortensen set a world speed record at 232 miles
per hour, more than 100 miles per hour faster than a
Quickie can fly. He had received his wish. It was so
aerodynamically clean that at 150 miles per hour, it
burned 7.5 gallons of fuel per hour.
“It had excellent visibility,” Mortensen said. “When
you went into a 70 degrees or 80 degrees bank around
the pylons, you could see the entire racecourse and
everybody out there. Whereas with the other biplanes,
you had a wing over the top of the cockpit with a center
pylon, and it blocked out your view. So you’re kind of
guessing in the dark.”
Rutan’s composite method was about to be put
to the ultimate test, though. In 1983 at the Reno Air
Races, a racer crossed in front of the AMSOIL Biplane
Racer, and Mortensen found himself caught in
wake turbulence.
“I got rolled almost inverted and didn’t have enough
control response to recover the aircraft in just three
seconds, from one hundred feet, before hitting the
ground,” Mortensen said.
The aircraft knife-edged into the desert at two
hundred miles per hour and then tumbled to a stop.
Mortensen got up and walked away from the crash.
“Burt had said, ‘I’m going to design this cockpit for
22 g in case something goes wrong out there on the
racecourse.’ He did a good job,” Mortensen said.
R
Danny Mortensen stopped to refuel at Mojave on his
way back from the Cleveland Air Races in 1979. He
consistently took fourth or fifth place in his Mong
biplane, and he felt that he needed a boost.
“I walked up to the door of the Rutan Aircraft
Factory, knocked on the door, and went in,” Mortensen
said. “Burt was sitting there working, and I said, ‘Hey, I
want to go faster at the air races. You want to design an
airplane for me? What’s it going to cost?’ And he said,
‘Send me a copy of the biplane rules, and I’ll take a look
at them. I always wanted to go air racing.’ ”
Mortensen initially had the idea when he first talked
to Rutan about modifying a Quickie to fit a Lycoming
O-320 engine. Rutan then suggested building a whole
new airplane instead.
“He designed three airplanes, and we took the least
risky design,” Mortensen said.
One of the radical designs, the Model 69, was a
joined-wing aircraft, like a biplane where the wings
slanted together to meet at the wingtips, sort of a reverse
X-wing. Mortensen’s choice, the original configuration of
Model 68, was the easiest and quickest to build.
The AMSOIL Biplane Racer still looked like a
Quickie, but it was substantially bigger, heavier, and
faster. The aircraft used three different composites,
Kevlar in the firewall between the engine and the
cockpit, carbon fiber in the airfoils, and fiberglass for
just about everything else.
W
AMSOIL
Biplane Racer
60
2.7b.jpg
85%
Y
Danny Mortensen flew
into Mojave one day and
asked Burt Rutan to
design him a very fast
biplane for air racing. The
result was the AMSOIL
Biplane Racer. The struts
between the wings, as
shown, were needed to
conform to the racing
rules for biplanes, but
it was normally flown
without them. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
2.7A FPO.tif
Burt Rutan came up with three concepts for Danny
Mortensen to choose from. The most radical concept
was a joined-wing racer. One concept had a wing
mounted on the engine nacelle. Mortensen chose the
third, which was the least radical of all the radical
concepts. Courtesy of Danny Mortensen
AMSOIL Biplane Racer Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Maximum speed
Cruise speed
Range
Ceiling
68
single-engine, biplane
N301LS
Danny Mortensen/AMSOIL
customer
customer
3 August 1981
Danny Mortensen
single-place
22 ft
79.6 ft2
6.36
22 ft
4 ft
854 lbs
1,167 lbs
Lycoming IO-320 A2B, 160+ hp
conventional, fixed
37 gal
750 ft
1,500 ft
1,500 fpm
232 mph
170 mph
600 miles
22,000+ ft
2.7C FPO.tif
Though it looks like a Quickie, the AMSOIL Biplane
Racer was substantially bigger. It was built with
high-performance materials, including carbon fiber
and Kevlar, whereas the Quickie was built only with
fiberglass. And the engine of the AMSOIL Biplane Racer
had nothing to do with economical flying—it had to do
with power and speed. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
61
2/3/11 2:30:43 PM
in sequence]
Next Generation
Trainer (NGT)
R
E
V
IE
O
P
W
2.8A FPO.tif
C
“Years after we built the AD-1, but only shortly after
NASA finished flight tests, along came Fairchild
Republic,” Rutan said. “And they figured out after
looking at what we had done with the AD-1, that maybe
we should build a flight test demonstrator of their design
for the new air force trainer under the NGT program.”
The Next Generation Trainer (NGT) was a replacement
for the aging Cessna T-37 Tweet. The Fairchild Republic
proposal called for a highly fuel efficient, twin turbofan
two-seater with an H-tail, which was an unusual tail
configuration at the time. So Fairchild Republic wanted to
beef up its contract bid with some real hard data.
“There were three or four companies bidding on the
NGT. They had low-speed wind tunnel tests,” Rutan
said. “But nobody thought that they could have manned
flight tests with their proposal, particularly ones in which
you could do departure, stall, and spin recovery tests.
This would really answer the customers’ concerns about
the configuration in a big way.”
Model 73, a 62 percent–scale version of Fairchild
Republic’s Next Generation Trainer, incorporated
fiberglass and foam construction with carbon fiber
skins and spars. Ames Industrial Corporation would
again supply BD-5J engines and fabricate the NGT
as it had done for AD-1, which had been the first
aircraft the company built from composites. Design and
construction of the scaled-down NGT took eight months
to complete, and during the following eight weeks, RAF
conducted a rigorous flight test program.
The flight test data RAF produced was included
with Fairchild Republic’s bid. The air force awarded the
contract to Fairchild Republic in July 1982. However,
the NGT program fell apart when it was determined that
the navy needed a new trainer as well. The eventual
solution was to have a joint trainer instead of two
separate trainers.
Y
2.8B FPO.tif
In order to win a contract for a new USAF trainer, Fairchild Republic hired Burt Rutan to build a 62 percent–scale
technology demonstrator. By going subscale, it could be built extremely cheaply and quickly in order to provide
flight test data that would help Fairchild Republic support its bid. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
62
Next Generation Trainer Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engines
Landing gear
Maximum speed
Cruise speed
73
twin-jet, subscale demonstrator
N73RA
Fairchild Republic
Ames Industrial Corporation
RAF
10 September 1981
Dick Rutan
single-place
21.9 ft
17.8 ft
5.7 ft
900 lbs
1,500 lbs
two Microturbo TRS18-046 turbojet engines,
220 lbs thrust each
288 mph (never exceed speed)
250 mph
The NGT was powered by twin Microturbo jet engines
provided by Ames Industrial. The full-scale NGT aircraft
would run on larger, higher performing jet engines. One
of the key elements evaluated during the flight testing
was the unconventional H-tail of the NGT. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
2.8C FPO.tif
Because it was subscale, that meant everything was
subscale except for the size of the pilot. So even though
it was a side-by-side trainer, the subscale NGT could
only fit one pilot. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
63
2/3/11 2:30:43 PM
2.9B FPO.tif
O
P
Y
2.9A FPO.tif
64
V
R
“The Grizzly is an airplane built for camping and landing
in meadows,” Burt Rutan said. “It had room for sleeping
in the back end. I did it because I was getting some
critiques that all these canard airplanes have real nice
performance, but they don’t have very good slow, shortfield performance. So I thought, well, I’ll just do one that
has short-field performance.”
At a landing speed of seventy-four miles per hour,
the VariEze came in quite a bit faster and shallower than
most light airplanes. The Long-EZ design improved upon
this, but not by much.
Rutan quietly designed Grizzly, which he didn’t
intend to market but did intend to prove that he was up
to the challenge.
Grizzly deployed, as shown, huge Fowler flaps on both
the canard and main wing. The canard Fowler flaps
were a record 55 percent of the canard’s chord. When
engaged, they extended backward, increasing wing
area, and downward, increasing the curvature of the
wing. These changes in the shape gave the aircraft
better lift, reduced the stall speed, and increased drag,
allowing for slower landing approach speeds. Courtesy
of Burt Rutan
E
Grizzly
IE
W
C
Made from fiberglass and foam construction with
carbon fiber strengthening, Grizzly had a forward-swept
canard and a main wing that were attached together
on each side by a stiffening boom, which ran from the
canard tip to midspan on the main wing. Only the main
wing inboard of the boom was forward swept. Ailerons
were mounted on the outboard sections of the main
wing, and the tail had a full flying horizontal stabilizer.
To make room for very large Fowler flaps, the booms
carried the fuel.
This was the first aircraft to be flown by Rutan using
forward-swept wings. Also, Fowler flaps were typically
used on much heavier and bigger airplanes.
Anyone sitting by a wing of an airliner as it’s getting
ready to land will see flaps engage where the back
edge of the wing extends outward and downward. A big
increase in lift results, enabling the airliner to approach
at a steeper angle and to land at a slower speed. Thus, it
stops in a shorter distance once its wheels hit the runway.
The pilot also gets a better view since the nose does not
pitch up as high since flaps create a large amount of drag.
When Grizzly’s Fowler flaps extended, they increased
the canard and wing widths by a whopping 55 percent.
This added forty-five square feet to the wing area.
“It had great takeoff and landing distances, and a
lift coefficient of about 3.7—twice a normal light plane,”
Rutan said.
Ultimately, Grizzly was a research project. It proved
to have excellent short takeoff and landing (STOL)
capabilities. Rutan had fun working on Grizzly and
learned about new flying characteristics, mechanical
systems, and construction methods.
He had also wanted to investigate using Grizzly
as a seaplane, where it could easily move back and
forth between water and land. However, with a new
homebuilt sailplane in development and other projects
running full steam ahead, he had to choose to put
Grizzly aside.
2.9C FPO.tif
Grizzly Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Minimum speed
Cruise speed
A research aircraft, Grizzly had a right wing with a
standard skinned foam core construction, and its left
wing tested a new honeycomb sandwich structure.
Specialized for short takeoff and landing (STOL), it
could be used for backcountry flying and camping.
Grizzly had long, curved front landing gear with
doubled-up tires suitable for rough terrain. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
72
three-surface, STOL
N80RA
RAF R&D
RAF
RAF
22 January 1982
Mike Melvill
four-place
1,474 lbs
2,494 lbs
Lycoming IO-360B, 180 hp
conventional, heavy duty, fixed
40 mph
132 mph
Most bush planes have high wings to ensure they clear
the bush and to give them a better view of the ground
below. Because this type of airplane flies so close to such
irregular terrain, it is important for the pilot to see the
condition of the ground before landing on what couldn’t be
expected as a smooth surface. Grizzly had low wings, but
it had bubbled-out side windows that allowed the pilot and
passengers to see straight down between the canard and
main wing. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
65
2/3/11 2:30:44 PM
Solitaire
2.10C FPO.tif
Y
2.10A FPO.tif
C
O
P
During the time of Grizzly’s construction, the Rutan
Aircraft Factory was an open shop. So when Burt Rutan
decided to build Grizzly under wraps, it was hard to hide
the fact that he was working on a new aircraft design.
Since he wasn’t going to sell plans for Grizzly, he
didn’t want homebuilders to stop buying Long-EZ plans,
thinking there was a new generation on the way when
there wasn’t. The Soaring Society of America’s selfpropelled sailplane competition scheduled for 1982 in
the nearby mountains of Tehachapi gave Rutan an idea.
He had always wanted to build a sailplane. After all, the
very basis of the composite construction methods he
pioneered originated from sailplane repair methods.
So by announcing that he would enter the
competition, he was able to keep people’s focus on the
hand that built Solitaire while other built Grizzly in secret.
Typically, a sailplane requires a tow plane to pull it
up into the air, but a self-propelled sailplane has its own
small engine to do this. The advantage is obviously that
the pilot does not have to wait around for a tow plane.
The disadvantage is that it has to incorporate all the
extra weight and complexity of an engine, so it will be
heavier and have worse performance than a sailplane
without an engine.
Solitaire’s entire engine folds out on a pylon from a
compartment in front of the pilot. After Solitaire took off
and ascended, it retracted the engine for gliding. Both
Rutan and Mike Melvill, the test pilot, were able to fly
longer than two hours without having to use the engine.
W
Solitaire Details
Shown with its engine stowed, the self-launching
sailplane Solitaire (Model 77) had airfoils that were
specially designed by John Roncz to provide maximum
soaring performance. Solitaire had a glide ratio of
32:1, minimum sink rate of 150 feet per second, and
maximum glide speed of 132 miles per hour. Courtesy
of Burt Rutan
R
66
E
V
IE
2.10B FPO.tif
At the time Solitaire was one of the most advanced
composite kits that homebuilders could purchase.
Its preformed fuselage had a honeycomb sandwich
structure of fiberglass and Nomex. In this static force
test, the wingtip bent down 45.5 inches, but once the
load was removed, the wing returned back to its normal
shape. The aircraft could handle +7/-3 g. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
The entire 23-horsepower
KFM 107E engine rose
out from a compartment
in front of the pilot. By
using this engine, Solitaire
didn’t need the help of a
tow plane. Construction
was estimated to take
400 hours and cost
between $7,000 and
$9,000, which included
the engine. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Max L/D
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Maximum speed
Cruise speed
Range
77
self-launching sailplane
N81RA
Reedley College, Reedley, CA
RAF
RAF
28 May 1982
Mike Melvill
single-place
41.8 ft
102.4 ft2 (canard and main wing)
20.79
19.2 ft
5.3 ft
380 lbs
620 lbs
KFM 107E, 23 hp (retractable)
tandem nosewheel and mainwheel,
wingtip wheels, fixed
5 gal
32
940 ft (powered)
300 ft (powered)
500 fpm (powered)
81 mph (powered)
63 mph (powered)
150 miles (powered)
Rutan used a hammerhead-style canard design for
Solitaire, where the canard’s leading edge was flush with
the tip of the nose. He felt that this configuration helped
reduce drag. Sailplanes must be very maneuverable and
be able to alter their glidepath in order to catch thermals,
the rising air that helps lift them up like soaring birds.
Normally, sailplanes use spoilers and flaps to make
these adjustments. However, these control surfaces
would cause dramatic pitching of Solitaire’s nose up or
down because of resulting changes to the lift of the wing.
Rutan had to design what’s called a spoilflap, which
created drag but did not change the lift of the wing, so
Solitaire could change speed without pitching its nose.
Since Rutan had finished his research with Grizzly
by now, he then got it qualified as a tow plane. So
during flight testing, or when time was an important
factor, Grizzly could get Solitaire high into the air much
faster. In the end, Solitaire helped get Grizzly built, and
then Grizzly helped Solitaire get built.
Rutan, a newly qualified tow pilot, with Melvill in
tow in Solitaire, took off from Mojave when the time
came for the competition. But Rutan released Melvill far
enough away from the airport so that when he landed,
Melvill was nowhere to be seen. That was until Melvill
snuck up on the airport and did three loops over the
runway. Solitaire won the competition as well as later
receiving an outstanding design award from the Soaring
Society of America.
Solitaire was far from a commercial success, though.
“Cost me twice as much to develop this as the Long-EZ,
and I sold about twelve kits,” Rutan said.
67
2/3/11 2:30:44 PM
2.11A FPO.tif
needed vertical stabilizers and rudder control.
Where to put more fuel as well? The fuselage had
the cockpit and engines. So by connecting the canard to
the wing with booms, like Grizzly, he could solve how to
support the wing and where to put the tail and fuel.
Carbon fiber honeycomb sandwich structure formed
the shell of Voyager, and every open space inside was
filled with fuel. The super-lightweight structure alone
weighed an astonishingly low 938 pounds, which was
slightly more than three times what the crew would weigh.
It took an outpouring of support, donations, and
volunteer hours to get Voyager off the ground. But
funding wasn’t the only challenge.
“Voyager was built uncompromised for range at the
expense of a whole bunch of other things—structures,
flying quality, system reliability, all those things,” said
Dick Rutan, who flew the flight test program. Every flight
had a problem.
68
2.11c.jpg
58%
Prepress please
color correct
V
IE
W
2.11b.jpg
30%
Prepress make
background white
Burt Rutan had judged that Love One and Big Bird, two aircraft designed for a roundthe-world flight, did not have the adequate performance to make it all the way. So he
began to think about the feasibility of building an aircraft that could do it. This early
sketch, drawn by Rutan, shows two designs he considered. Burt Rutan would soon
after partner with Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager to design, build, and fly Voyager.
R
In the late 1960s, Jim Bede built the BD-2 Love One
(Low Orbit Very Efficient), which was based off a
conventional sailplane design, to fly around the world.
In the early 1980s, the Quickie Aircraft Corporation
began development on the world flyer Big Bird, also a
monoplane based off a sailplane. Tom Jewett of QAC
had worked with Burt Rutan for Bede.
“In my opinion, neither one of those airplanes had
enough range to fly around the world,” Rutan said. “So I
had kind of in the back of my mind that someday I may
try it.”
Quite a rivalry had developed between RAF and QAC
by this time. Rutan started to make calculations himself
about the feasibility of a round-the-world (RTW) flight. He
even considered a flying wing. A B-52 bomber held the
long-distance record at the time of 12,532 miles, which
amounted to only halfway around the planet.
That was about it until Dick Rutan and his partner
Jeana Yeager called a meeting with Burt Rutan in 1981
at a cafe to discuss building a world-class aerobatic
airplane called Monarch.
By this point, Burt Rutan was very busy with the
design of Starship, a large, twin pusher engine, business
aircraft. However, he had a policy of not doing high-risk
airplanes for the public, so he offered a counterproposal.
“Dick had already set a world distance record in my
Long-EZ. And he was just drooling at the mouth to do
world records,” Burt Rutan said. “And I mentioned that
it is possible for what Bede tried to do. ‘I think I have a
design that will do that. Why don’t you do that instead
of this aerobatic thing?’ ”
They wholeheartedly agreed. So he revealed to them
his concept of what would become Voyager. “I drew on
a napkin a sketch of what I had been designing. So that
E
Voyager
Voyager was designed for only one specific task—to fly around the world, nonstop,
and without refueling. The closest attempt made by any other aircraft beforehand
was in a B-52, a long-range strategic bomber with eight jet engines. Halfway around
was only as far as the B-52 could get, though. A monumental challenge awaited
Voyager. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
C
O
P
Y
napkin was actually not an original idea. That napkin was
a conveying of the configuration to Dick and Jeana, who
had not seen it before.”
The design centered on the single most important
element required to circumnavigate the globe. Just as
with the Spirit of St. Louis, Voyager was a flying fuel
tank—seventeen fuel tanks to be exact. Because of
the dramatic difference in weight of Voyager at the
beginning a flight compared to the end as fuel burned
off, Burt Rutan decided that by staging two state-of-theart engines, he could keep one or two of the engines
running at the highest efficiency possible.
The engines had to be inline, push and pull,
because as the flight progressed, one of the engines
would be shut off. The wing had to be designed for
soaring, so it was long and thin like Solitaire. However,
since it would be laden with fuel, there needed to be
additional support. Rutan added a canard but still
The size of the right boom was increased slightly forward at the tip in order for it
to house a weather radar. And to improve Voyager’s performance, the wing was
extended and winglets were added. The extensions on each side of the wing did not
contain fuel but were foam core. Voyager had never been filled to the max with fuel
before, and as Voyager took off on its round the world flight, its wingtips scraped on
the runway. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
69
2/3/11 2:30:46 PM
2.11d.jpg
57%
2.12A FPO.tif
O
P
Left: There is an exciting feel with a pusher engine.
Something at the back is thrusting the aircraft
forward, almost like jet power or rocket power.
The use of a pusher engine was part of the appeal
of the VariViggen, Burt Rutan’s first homebuilt
aircraft (center), and the VariEze, his first composite
homebuilt (right). Even his first twin engine, the
Defiant (left), had a pusher. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
V
IE
2.12c.jpg
45%
W
Above: Voyager required two engines because
staging them was more fuel efficient than using a
single engine and slowly reducing its power, thus its
efficiency, as fuel burned off. But in order to keep
symmetrical thrust when only one of the two engines
ran during staging, they needed to have an in-line,
push-pull configuration. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
This drawing shows the installation of a
100-horsepower Continental aircraft engine and a
62-horsepower Volkswagen automotive engine in
a VariEze homebuilt. Because the Continental was
more powerful and massive, it took up the whole
engine compartment so even the battery had to be
moved forward to balance the weight. Courtesy of
Burt Rutan
E
R
70
C
2.12B FPO.tif
Burt Rutan has gone through a conversion in his understanding of pusher
engines and came to realize some observations he made about them in the
past aren’t accurate. “I said that if you’ve got a pusher, it draws the air
towards the propeller and keeps from having separation on the back of the
fuselage. So it’s actually less drag, and, of course, it’s quieter because the
engine and propeller are way back there instead of right here in front of you.”
Back during the development of his pusher-engine designs, Rutan studied
engine position using a Cessna 337 Skymaster, a push-pull twin. He made a
performance comparison of the different positions by switching off one engine
at a time while feathering the stopped engine’s propeller, which turned the
propeller blades parallel to the airstream to reduce drag.
“If you feather the front engine, go full power on the back, do a singleengine climb, and measure your climb performance,” Rutan said of the
comparison, “then feather the back engine, go full power of the front, and
repeat the maneuver, the airplane climbs better if the back engine is running
and the front is feathered.”
Back then, he reasoned from this performance that pusher engines were
more efficient than tractor engines. He now admits that he was wrong. “They
aren’t more efficient,” he said. “It’s just that the Cessna Skymaster had such a
horribly blunt back end with massive separation and drag. By running that back
propeller, it made that a lot better. This isn’t true on a Defiant or a VariEze or
a Long-EZ when you have a good cowling.”
As far as the sound level, the interaction between the wing and pusher
engine produced a significant source of noise. As the pusher propeller spins
around, it encounters fast moving air as it swings above and below the wing.
But each time it passes directly behind the wing, it hits slower moving air. So
the propeller vibrates, shaking fore and aft, because during each full rotation,
the blades go from fast air to slow air to fast air to slow air.
“Pushers will get shockwaves momentarily, twice per revolution. And that’s
why when you hear a pusher fly over, like an Avanti or a Starship or a Defiant or
a Skymaster, you hear this bad fretting,” Rutan said.
Voyager was a push-pull, requiring both engines for staging. Specially
designed to accomplish a single mission, Voyager ran only one engine during
most of round-the-world flight while the other engine feathered. Efficiency was
critical, of course. But Rutan would soon consider designing smaller aircraft
with the goals of being the most efficient and having the longest range.
“I was doing Catbird and Boomerang,” Rutan said. “And there’s no way I
would use a pusher.”
Y
Pusher Engines are Pushed Aside
“I’d tell him how bad it flew, and Burt said,
‘Remember our agreement.’ And the agreement was
that it had to have mission adequate flying qualities,”
Dick Rutan said. “So since it was a world flight, it really
technically didn’t have to turn at all. Maybe Burt told me
that tongue-in-cheek. But if we had to fix any of those
things that were wrong with it, we wouldn’t have made
it around the world. So actually in Burt’s genius, he did
it just right.”
Voyager actually did have good flying qualities when
it wasn’t full of fuel. Dick Rutan praised its handling on
the first flight. But Voyager would not be flying around
the world with only two or three days’ worth of fuel.
“When it was flown with about four days’ fuel
onboard, it became a lumbering beast that required a lot
more pilot attention than when it was light, particularly
in turbulent air,” Burt Rutan said. “When it was loaded
above a seven-day fuel load, it became what is known
as dynamically unstable in pitch. This was a dangerous
flying characteristic that could be damped and smoothly
flown by the autopilot. However, when the pilot was
flying it without autopilot, it required his complete
attention to keep it flying safely. Inattention would result
in the aircraft diverging in a wing-flapping mode such
that it would destroy itself in less than a minute.”
One of Voyager’s winglets, damaged by scraping along
the runway, fell off right after takeoff. To make Voyager
symmetrical, Dick Rutan was able to snap off the other
winglet using aerodynamic forces. After very careful
inspection, no fuel was found to be leaking from either
wingtip. Voyager then pressed on to begin its recordbreaking journey. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
2.11e.jpg
100%
EAA’s AirVenture Museum in Oshkosh, Wisconsin,
has an expansive exhibit dedicated to Voyager, which
includes a full-size replica of its fuselage with a
cutaway of the cockpit. This photograph of an exhibit
diagram shows the amount of space Dick Rutan and
Jeana Yeager had in Voyager as they circled Earth.
Dan Linehan
71
2/3/11 2:30:47 PM
IE
A push-pull engine configuration propelled Voyager
around the world. But both engines were not always on
at the same time. As fuel burned off, less power was
needed. Instead of reducing the power of both engines,
it was more fuel efficient to run only one at higher
power. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
72
R
E
V
After setting a world closed-course distance record
of 11,857 miles on a warmup flight doing laps up and
down the West Coast five months earlier, Dick Rutan
and Jeana Yeager climbed into the cockpit of Voyager
to set off on their journey like the world explorers of old.
On 14 December 1986, Rutan looked out through the
small bubble canopy as the long runway of Edwards Air
Force Base stretched out as far as he could see. This
was nowhere near as seemingly endless as the potential
thirteen days of nonstop, nonrefueled flying that waited
past the end of the runway.
It took nearly three miles for Voyager, which was
72 percent fuel by weight, to lift off. Voyager flew west
over the Pacific Ocean toward Hawaii to make use of
the strong tradewinds and fly around the fattest part
of Earth. The flight plan called for Voyager to cross
over as much ocean as possible to avoid having to
W
C
O
P
2.11G FPO.tif
Y
2.11F FPO.tif
After flying for 9 days, 3 minutes, and 44
seconds, covering a distance of 24,986 miles,
evading a typhoon, dodging hostile aircraft, riding
out thunderstorms, performing in-flight repairs,
resuscitating a sickly engine, being cooped up together
for so long in such a small space, landing with only
2 percent of the original fuel load, and smashing the
previous world record, it was time for hugs. Courtesy
of Burt Rutan
coordinate with foreign countries during the flyover.
Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager skirted a typhoon north
of Papua New Guinea and tried to navigate around
storms that seemed to trace from the tip of India to the
coast of South America.
The crew tackled the loss of wingtips minutes after
takeoff; an autopilot failure; oil, coolant, fuel problems;
and an engine out on the homestretch with the coast
of California just about in sight. But aside from weather
and mechanical problems, Rutan and Yeager braved
brutal fatigue cramped together in Voyager’s tiny cockpit.
On December 23, Voyager touched down after
circling Earth on a record-shattering 24,986-mile path
while in the air for 9 days, 3 minutes, and 44 seconds.
With an average speed of 116 miles per hour, Voyager
had burned through all but 140 pounds of its starting
7,011.5 pounds of fuel.
Voyager Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Length
Height
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engines
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Maximum speed
Speed for max range
Range
Ceiling
76
long range, twin engine
N269VA
National Air & Space Museum, Washington, DC
Voyager Aircraft Inc.
RAF
RAF, Voyager Aircraft Inc.
22 June 1984
Dick Rutan
2
110.8 ft (with winglets)
362 ft2
33.8 (wing), 18.1 (canard)
25.4 ft (fuselage), 29.2 ft (boom)
10.3 ft
2,250 lbs
9,694.5 lbs
Teledyne Continental O-240, 130 hp (front)
Teledyne Continental IOL-200, 110 hp (rear)
tricycle, retractable (manually)
7,011.5 pounds
14,200 ft (gross wt)
150 mph
135 mph (first day RTW)
85 mph (last day RTW)
24,986 miles (RTW)
21,000 ft
73
2/3/11 2:30:48 PM
C
O
P
and after the flight and watch everybody,” Rutan said.
“They had a certain allowance because people would
sweat and perspire. You’d bring food along—four
hundred miles was a long time. But then you’d eat
it and it ended up in your bodies. They weighed the
people separately. And they did all kinds of things
to make sure you couldn’t cheat. But by these two
weighings, they’d get the amount of fuel that you used.”
Catbird was optimized to reduce aerodynamic drag.
The wetted area, or area that comes in direct contact
with the airstream, was minimized by eliminating
everything possible sticking off the fuselage, wings, and
empennage. The overall shape looked like a sailplane.
“It had the very best airfoils in the world,” Rutan
said. He had John Roncz design these airfoils—the
cross-sectional shapes of the wing—specifically for
Catbird. Roncz had also designed airfoils for several
other RAF airplanes, including Solitaire and Voyager.
Rutan’s second company, Scaled Composites,
had been in operation for several years. At the time of
Catbird’s development, it was owned by Beechcraft. Jim
Walsh, the president of Beechcraft back then, got to see
what Rutan was building.
“He envisioned that, ‘Hey, the technology that’s
gonna come out of this in terms of performance is world
class, and that is of interest to Beechcraft. Because if
2.13c.jpg
39%
V
IE
2.13b.jpg
70%
W
Burt Rutan designed Catbird, Model 81, with the sole purpose of being the most
efficient light aircraft ever in order to compete in the CAFE 400 race and take the
title away from RAF’s flightline adversaries, the Quickie guys. In 1988, Catbird did
claim the title, having scored more than 18 percent higher than any of the previous
years’ high scores. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
In 1981, efficiency aficionado Brian Seeley devised the
250-mile-long Competition in Aircraft Fuel Efficiency
250 (CAFE 250) and in the following year expended it
to the 400-mile-long CAFE 400. RAF flew its VariEze,
Long-EZ, and Defiant up to Santa Rosa, California, to
compete in this annual race.
“It was a big knock down, drag out after the Quickie
guys started their business,” Burt Rutan said. “They
had a Q2. And they went up there and beat us with
this Q2 or Q200. So they would put out these ads in
Sport Aviation, even in Flying I think—the world’s most
efficient airplane. That kinda burned me.”
Rutan was part of the design team with Gene
Sheehan and Tom Jewett that developed the Quickie
(Model 54). The Q2 was a larger, two-place version of
the Quickie, and the Q200 was a step up from the Q2,
running with the more powerful Continental
O-200 engine.
“So I decided to build an airplane they couldn’t
beat,” Rutan said.
It wasn’t an airplane that Rutan really needed. It was
really the challenge he needed.
After building and flying thirteen different types of
manned aircraft, Catbird came along looking very much
like the typical aircraft Rutan seemed to do his very best
to steer away from. Don’t be fooled. Catbird’s whiskers
are actually a forward-swept canard, and the t-tail and
wings are also forward swept.
“This is an interesting part of the RAF story because
it was a significant event that we went to every year,”
Rutan said. “We planned for it. We tweaked our airplanes
performance. It affected the work that we did to get better
efficiency on airplanes, which usually you wouldn’t pay
a lot of attention to cause someone will buy a VariEze
because of how looks, not what the fuel flow is.”
Seeley understood that there was a limit on the
efficiency of an airplane due to the laws of physics and
properties of air and fuel. To measure efficiency for the
race, he came up with a formula based on average
speed, amount of fuel used, and mass of payload. The
winner had to post the highest score using this formula.
“The airplane had to have a certain takeoff and
landing performance,” Rutan said. “He didn’t say a stall
speed. But he said you had to get off the ground on the
takeoff on this four hundred–mile trip with all the people
on board. You had to climb over this string on the runway.”
Rutan felt that advertised “brochure performance”
of aircraft did not always measure up to actual
performance, so the CAFE 400 gave a good way to
show off the performance differences between aircraft
that flew governed by the same set of rules.
Race officials on mountaintops watched as the
racers made their way around turning points. “To get
miles per gallon, they would weigh the airplanes before
Y
Catbird
2.13A FPO.tif
74
R
E
Even the seating of Catbird emphasized efficiency.
The pilot and passengers were packed to minimize
the required cabin space by considering the shape of
people sitting down. So the pilot sat centered in front,
giving the front row passengers leg room to the sides,
and the back row passengers faced the tail with their
legs in the narrowing part of fuselage.
Catbird now perches, upside down, from the rafters
of a hangar in Scaled Composites. This location and
orientation may seem to be a strange place for an
aircraft that currently holds two world records. But
the top planform is Burt Rutan’s favorite view. And the
Catbird’s engine moved to his favorite airplane, the
Boomerang. Dan Linehan
we do a Bonanza replacement, we want to get the very
best performance that you can get’—the best range,
the best cruise speed, and so on. So he said, ‘Listen,
I’m interested in that. Why don’t we help you pay for it?’
So the Catbird for about a year or so got funding. The
people who were building it, just a couple of people, got
paid by Scaled, which was owned by Beechcraft. And
they also bought the engine for it.”
In 1988, Catbird, piloted by Mike Melvill, won the
CAFE 400, having also set a new all-time high score by
the wide margin of nearly 18 percent above the previous
record. In 1994, Dick Rutan broke a world speed record
in Catbird, flying a 1,243-mile-long (2,000 kilometers)
closed course at 246.5 miles per hour. About a month
later, Melvill set the same record, but with Catbird at a
weight class one level higher, at 257.1 miles per hour.
Catbird had accomplished the weight class jump by
adjusting fuel and payload. These two world records
currently stand.
Catbird now hangs upside-down in one of Scaled
Composites’ hangars. “It’s a pretty airplane on top.
Almost every airplane is like that,” Rutan said. But why
should such a successful aircraft be relegated to the
rafters? The answer to this was the arrival of Rutan’s
favorite and arguably one of his more unconventionallooking designs.
Catbird Details
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Empty weight
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Maximum speed
Cruise speed
Cruise altitude
81
single-engine, three-surface
N187RA
Scaled Composites (static display)
RAF R&D/Beechcraft
RAF/Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
14 January 1988
Mike Melvill
five-place
32 ft
100 ft2
10.24
1,425 lbs
2,850 lbs
Lycoming TIO-360C1A6D, 210 hp
74 gal
272 mph (100% power)
251 mph (75% power)
24,000 ft
75
2/3/11 2:30:48 PM
2.14b FPO
C
O
P
Y
2.14A FPO.tif
IE
Boomerang
“Boomerang is a phenomenal airplane from the
standpoint of its range, its performance, its speed,
and its noise level. The fact that you do not even need
to touch the rudder pedals in order to fly it at its stall
speed with an engine out is something that is unheard
of for multiengine airplanes,” Burt Rutan said of the
design of his that is the most widely misunderstood
and underappreciated. “It is the airplane I am most
proud of.”
When Rutan wanted to fly anywhere, he had a small
fleet to chose from, a VariEze, Long-EZ, Defiant, Catbird,
and Grumman Tiger, which was the company’s utility
aircraft. His highest amount of flying time in any one
aircraft came in the Defiant.
76
R
E
V
The Boomerang is Burt Rutan’s favorite aircraft.
When he reflects about all his designs, he regards the
Boomerang as his best achievement in general aviation
because of its safety, performance, configuration, and
the way it was fabricated. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
W
2.14c.tif
100%
A twin-engine aircraft is significantly more of a challenge to design than is a singleengine aircraft. This is because a twin must be able to fly not just with two engines
but also when one of the two has failed. So the design consideration goes from two
permutations with a single—either on or off—to four permutations with a twin—
either both on, engine #1 on and engine #2 off, engine #1 off and engine #2 on, or
both off. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
While the Boomerang’s normal cruise speed is a
blistering 263 knots (303 miles per hour), when slowed
to its long-range speed of 186 knots (214 miles per
hour) and an altitude of 19,000 feet, the Boomerang
could comfortably carry four people a range of 2,600
nautical miles (2,990 statute miles), without the need
of ferry tanks. That’s plenty of distance to cover a flight
from Mojave to Hawaii. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
“I felt more comfortable particularly at night and
certainly over the mountains to have two engines,” he
said.
However, Rutan felt that he had one more
homebuilt in him. In the early 1990s, under Rutan
Designs, he started privately funding the development
of Boomerang. Rutan occasionally does work that is
not associated directly with RAF or Scaled Composites.
Rutan Designs is a personal business that he put
together for this purpose.
“It was the airplane that I built for myself so I could
fly to Europe and Australia. I wanted to fly around
the world. I wanted to do all kinds of things with the
Boomerang. So Catbird wasn’t all that attractive to me.
Except for one thing, it had a TIO-360—a turbocharged,
constant-speed prop engine—battery, and everything.
So I moved it over to the Boomerang to save money.”
Rutan laid out a set of high-performance
specifications for himself that focused not just on speed
but on range. Even more important than these criteria,
though, was that he wanted a multiengine airplane
77
2/3/11 2:30:49 PM
78
E
V
202
twin-engine, asymmetrical configuration
N24BT
still flying
Rutan Designs
Rutan Designs
Rutan Designs
19 June 1996
Mike Melvill (pilot) and Burt Rutan (copilot)
five-place
36.7 ft
101.7 ft2
13.2
30.6 ft
2,370 lbs
4,242 lbs
813 lbs (with full fuel)
Lycoming TIO-360A1B, 200 hp (on boom)
Lycoming TIO-360C1A6D, 210 hp (on fuselage)
1,007 lbs
2,750 ft
2,580 ft
1,900 fpm
326 mph (100% power)
302 mph (75% power, at 19,000 feet)
1,900 miles
215 mph (37% power, at 20,000 feet)
2,750 miles (37% power, at 20,000 feet)
102 mph
R
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight crew
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Aspect ratio
Length
Empty weight
Gross weight
Payload
Engines
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Takeoff distance
Landing distance
Rate of climb
Maximum speed
Max cruise speed
Range at max cruise speed
Speed for max range
Maximum range
Stall speed
A
C
2.14h.jpg
29%
E
2.14l.jpg
29%
I
2.14f.jpg
29%
2.14g.jpg
29%
C
D
2.14j.jpg
29%
2.14k.jpg
29%
G
H
2.14n.jpg
29%
2.14o.jpg
29%
K
L
Y
2.14e.jpg
29%
O
P
2.14d.jpg
29%
W
Boomerang Details
He found common ground by shifting engines back
and forth along the wing until ultimately one engine
left the wing entirely. To offset weights, he shifted the
wing more to one side and tilted and swept sections of
it. An engine nacelle boom added structural strength
and stowing capacity. Twin rudders trailed behind the
engines directly in their propeller wash.
The center of gravity (CG) is a critical balance
point for any aircraft. For a twin, the farther away the
engines are from the CG, the more turning force results
if one engine stops running. So a greater counteracting
force is then needed to keep the aircraft on course.
Boomerang’s configuration dramatically reduced the
distance of the engines from the CG, and its builtin aerodynamics naturally provided much of the
counteracting force.
What Rutan created was an airplane that looked
asymmetric but flew symmetrically. If either engine went
out, Boomerang still flew symmetrically with very little
required to compensate for the dead engine. No other
twin-engine aircraft comes close to this.
When it came time to build Boomerang, Rutan
developed a new manufacturing method to build
the fuselage.
“I was going to build an airplane that was filamentwound carbon fiber and was grid stiffened, not
sandwich. As part of the manufacturing process, I had
this one-pound foam that was part of the tool, and then
I just put a ply on the inside. I had an absolutely airtight
and very well insulated cabin.”
By making a male tool in the shape of the
fuselage with the foam insulation layer grooved, he
easily spun the carbon fiber around it. It took only
fourteen hours to spin up the fuselage and several
other major components.
Aside from the breakthroughs in asymmetric design
and one-piece, filament-wound fuselage fabrication,
Rutan had developed an idea for a revolutionary
pressurization system and intended to come up with a
state-of-the-art avionics system for Boomerang.
Even though too many other projects pulled him
away from completing these final two goals, Rutan
emphasized, “Boomerang is my best work in general
aviation by a long margin.”
IE
with very safe engine-out characteristics. His push-pull
Defiant fell into this category, but also fell short on what
he now pursued.
“There’s a bunch of things about a push-pull that
surprised me on the Defiant performance-wise and
noise-wise and vibration-wise,” Rutan said. “My mind
kept saying don’t even go there. Don’t try to solve
those problems.”
Rutan’s previous three RAF designs included Solitaire,
Voyager, and Catbird. All had sailplane-like qualities. He
wanted this new twin to look and perform like a sailplane
with its long slender fuselage and small tail.
“I just knew that to get a big jump in performance
I had to do something that was kind of a clone halfway
between a conventional light twin and a competition
L/D 60 sailplane. And I kept coming back to this
asymmetric configuration.”
Rutan shaped and reshaped this aerodynamic
puzzle of causes and effects as he tried to balance
performance and safety. He was not satisfied that these
were mutually exclusive.
B
2.14i.jpg
29%
F
2.14m.jpg
29%
J
This diagram and description from Burt Rutan explain
how a symmetrical twin-engine aircraft evolved into
an asymmetrical twin-engine aircraft, starting the
sequence with (A) the baseline of a Beechcraft Baron
Model 58P. The small circle behind the windshield
represents the center of gravity. (B) The left engine
moved outboard to improve symmetry at low speeds
and to reduce cabin noise. (C) Both engines moved
inboard to reduce minimum control speed. The right
engine moved forward to clear fuselage, and the left
engine moved aft to balance. (D) Wing skewed to
support engines and to reduce left engine interference.
(E) Composite construction allows smaller, higher
aspect ratio wing, but configuration is now noseheavy, thus left wing is swept forward. This helps, but
configuration is still nose-heavy. (F) The weight savings
allows smaller engines, and tail area can be reduced.
(G) High aspect ratio tail flutter problem is fixed with
nacelle boom. This allows additional baggage room in
the boom. (H) The right engine is moved to the fuselage
to reduce weight, cost, and drag. Lateral balance is
restored by moving entire wing to the left. Minimum
control speed is now well below stall. (I) The left
engine is moved outboard to reduce cabin noise and to
eliminate prop interference. The entire wing is moved
left to restore lateral balance. (J) Twin small vertical
tails improve low-speed handing, reduce weight, and
allow low-drag pressure-recover aft fuselage. (K)
Continued evolution: round fuselage, increase room,
laminar flow flying surfaces, higher wing loading, aspect
ratio to 13.2, and full-span camber control for aileron/
flap/wing optimization. (L) In the Boomerang, the
pilot sits in right seat, aft section is seat or bed, and
baggage area in the boom is 120 inches long (indicated
by dotted oval). Courtesy of Burt Rutan
79
2/3/11 2:30:51 PM
Y
Chapter 3
O
P
3.0.jpg
100%
Is there larger or
alternative pic
The Scaled
Composites Years
V
IE
W
C
Can’t find suggeted replacement pic
(013 FPO)?
“The reason they were built at just that scale was that
we could identify an available jet engine we could
afford,” Burt Rutan said. “And we had to build an
aircraft that was the size and weight so that it would fly
well with those engines.”
The other important element is that subscale
versions are smaller, thus, easier and cheaper to build.
To get the weight of a subscale aircraft, the scale factor
is cubed. So, for example, an aircraft at 50 percent
scale would weigh 12.5 percent of the full-sized version.
“We built a 62 percent NGT. It had adequate
thrust, and it would fly single-engine on the Microturbo
engines. By putting the pilot in the center of a side-byside airplane, he had room.”
But doing a project like NGT did create some
unexpected problems for Rutan and RAF. Fairchild
Republic had hoped that RAF’s work would win it a giant
contract with the USAF, which it did indeed do. But this
work was proprietary. It was work that Fairchild Republic
was having RAF do to get a leg up on the competition.
Fairchild Republic wanted its bid to win. So obviously it
needed RAF’s work kept a secret.
It was hard to keep a project like NGT quiet when
RAF had a business that was trying to bring in people
to sell them homebuilt kit plans and to give them
builder support. RAF welcomed homebuilders in to
troubleshoot as well help teach them how to work with
composites. On one hand, RAF had an open house,
but on the other, it had one curtain in the corner that
it didn’t want the public looking behind. Besides, the
resulting flight test program of confidential work could
not be completed indoors.
80
R
E
Scaled Composites’ projects are often veiled in secrecy. The company was
founded in 1982 during a time when the Rutan Aircraft Factory still worked
on airplanes like Grizzly and Solitaire. It had become evident as Rutan Aircraft
Factory worked on programs like the NGT that its open-door policy conflicted
with the need for confidentiality. Shown here behind the curtain is the beginning
of SpaceShipOne and White Knight. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
The design for the Starship, a twin pusher propeller business aircraft with a variable sweeping
canard, began in 1981 by Burt Rutan for Beechcraft while he still ran Rutan Aircraft Factory.
What he would eventually build and fly, though, was an 85 percent–scale version based on
this design. Rutan already had experience building subscale demonstrators for NASA, with
AD-1 (15 percent scale), and Fairchild Republic, with NGT (62 percent scale).
81
2/3/11 2:30:51 PM
Plans End
and Plans Begin
1
6
2
3
8
5
11
7
4
10
9
12
Designs from Scaled Composites,
1983 to 1991
1—Pegasus
2—Starship (Model 115)
3—Microlight (Model 97)
4—ATTT (Model 133)
5—ATTT (Model 133-B)
6—Triumph (Model 143)
7—ARES (Model 151)
8—Scarab
9—CM-44 (Model 144)
10—Predator (Model 120)
11—Pond Racer (Model 158)
12—Stars and Stripes Wing Sail
Range of Max Altitudes
Scaled
RAF
0
10,000
20,000
30,000 40,000
Max Altitude (feet)
50,000
60,000
70,000
Range of Max Speeds
V
Scaled
RAF
100
82
R
E
0
C
O
P
Y
I would do the things that Scaled Composites did or I
would do the things that Rutan Aircraft Factory did. And
the main reason I chose Scaled Composites is I really
didn’t have anything on the burner that I thought was
a breakthrough new homebuilt airplane that would be
significantly better and interesting compared to the others
that were out there. It came at a time when I didn’t have
any new ideas, and I decided to close up RAF.”
In Canard Pusher No. 45, July 1985, Rutan
announced that RAF would stop selling homebuilt plans.
However, RAF continued with builder support for twenty
or so more years.
Not only did RAF undergo a big change, but so
did Scaled Composites. That same year, Beechcraft
purchased Scaled Composites.
“Anyway, ’85 comes along and Jim Walsh takes
over as president of Beechcraft,” Rutan said. “And he
announces to me that he wants us to get involved in a
whole variety of airplanes, not just the Starship.”
W
Over the first three years of Scaled Composites’ existence,
Rutan felt more and more that the homebuilt market
was reaching a saturation point for his designs. He could
only sell so many sets of plans. And for the few hundred
dollars he’d gain for each, it would cost countless hours in
builder support. His business model for RAF would soon
become unsustainable. And there were other concerns for
RAF. Rutan had to make a very hard decision.
“We shut down the business in 1985 mainly
because I was doing two businesses and this one had
the large product liability risk,” Rutan said.
While product liability and consumer protection
are very important, frivolous lawsuits can crush a
small business. If a person decides to take his alleged
girlfriend on a ride, after drinking alcohol, forgets to
install bolts used to reattach the wing, and is killed
along with her from the resulting accident, is it right
that the widow sues the designer of the homebuilt kit?
Isn’t this like getting scalded after trying to smuggle a
hot cup of coffee, in your pants, into a movie theater
then blaming the coffeehouse where the coffee was
purchased because it was too hot?
“One of the least pleasant things you can do in life is
to have to get acquainted with a lot of different lawyers. I
didn’t enjoy any of that. So I had to pick in 1985 whether
IE
3.1A FPO.tif
200
300
Max Speed (mph)
400
500
The graphs show the range of max altitudes and range
of max speeds for Scaled Composites and RAF manned
aircraft prior to SpaceShipOne. Compared to RAF in
each graph, Scaled Composites has double the range.
However, when SpaceShipOne came along, it flew
at a max speed of Mach 3.25 and a max altitude of
367,500 feet—way off the charts. Dan Linehan
Vehicles in all
Shapes and Scales
“The business that I founded in ’82, Scaled Composites,
is very different,” Burt Rutan said when comparing
Rutan Aircraft Factory during a talk in 2009 at the Art
Center College of Design in Pasadena, California. “We’ve
First Flights of Manned Aircraft by Rutan Aircraft
Factory (Blue) and Scaled Composites (White)
DateAircraft
1972
VariViggen
1975
VariEze POC
1975
VariViggen SP
1976
VariEze Homebuilt
1977
Quickie
1978
Defiant
1979
Long-EZ
1979AD-1
1981AMSOIL Biplane Racer
1981NGT
1982
Grizzly
1982
Solitaire
1983
Microlight
1983
Starship
1984
Voyager
1984
Predator
1987
CM-44
1987ATTT
1988
Catbird
1988Triumph
1988ATTT Bronco Tail
1990ARES
DateAircraft
1990
Lima 1
1991
Pond Racer
1991
Lima 2
1991Earthwinds
1993Raptor D-1
1993
Jet LEZ Vantage
1994Raptor D-2
1996
Boomerang
1996
Vantage (VisionAire)
1997
V-Jet II
1998
Global Hilton
1998
Proteus
1999Roton
2000Adam 309
2001Rodie LEZ
2002TAA-1
2002White Knight
2003
SpaceShipOne
2004
GlobalFlyer
2007
Pulse-Detonation LEZ
2008WhiteKnightTwo
2010
SpaceShipTwo
developed, so far, twenty-eight manned airplane types.
The concepts were done inhouse for twenty-four of
them. Some of the concepts came to us, and we built
their design. We did three company-funded research
programs. Six of these types, so far, and again, this is
just the manned airplanes, were for U.S. government
customers. Four had a prime aerospace-based
customer. Five were foreign customers. And we did no
marketing at all to the public.”
When the fifteen manned airplane types built under
the banner of RAF and the Scaled Composites’ list with
one new addition are considered, over a thirty-nine year
period, from the VariViggen in 1972 to SpaceShipTwo
in 2010, forty-four manned aircraft types in total were
built. That is an astounding statistic—greater than one
new aircraft per year.
It is important to note that not every one of these
vehicles was completely designed from the ground up
and flown entirely by Scaled Composites each time. In
some cases an existing aircraft type like the Long-EZ
was modified to evaluate a new engine, as with the Jet
LEZ Vantage and Pulse-Detonation LEZ. And for Roton
and the balloon gondolas, Earthwinds and Global Hilton,
Scaled Composites focused on their airframes.
“I did do all the designs myself at RAF, and for most
of the aircraft that Scaled developed up to about ten
years ago,” Rutan said. “All the Scaled designs had other
designers for systems and for structural details, but I
was responsible for the design concepts and the basic
preliminary designs.”
Scaled Composites has continually brought in
very talent engineers and personnel. And they have
made integral contributions to the vehicles built by
Scaled Composites.
“Actually, for the last aircraft that I did have design
responsibility—SpaceShipOne and White Knight—I
did more detailed design than I did for most of the
previous Scaled projects. I did do the majority of detail
design releases to shop on things like landing gear,
flight controls, ECS (not avionics), rocket propulsion tank
and CTN, structure and manufacturing method, etc. I
designed the airfoils for the SpaceShipOne wing and
tail, which was unusual, since I had others do airfoils for
almost all other Scaled aircraft.”
Later, we will devote entire chapters to Rutan’s
celebrated private spaceflight breakthroughs, first
with SpaceShipOne and White Knight, and later,
SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo. For now, we will
provide an overview of other manned vehicles flown
by Scaled Composites, then touch on unmanned and
nonflying projects, providing summaries and brief
descriptions of each. Refer to the paintings by Stan Stokes
to get a sense of the huge variety of vehicles Scaled
Composites has worked on. Finally, the book’s appendix
provides a partial listing of RAF and Scaled Composites
projects by model number. It is a long but incomplete list.
83
2/3/11 2:30:51 PM
3.1C FPO.tif
Y
O
P
Even at 85 percent scale, the twin, pusher engine Starship (Model 115) dwarfs
previous Rutan designs. The four-place, push-pull Defiant; the two-place, pusher
Long-EZ; and the two-place, pusher VariViggen are shown behind the Starship, front
to back. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
3.4C FPO.tif
To improve the functionality of the ATTT (Model 133),
it was redesigned with a bronco tail and access out
the back. Shown here on the left as the new Model
133-B, these modifications made it easier for air drops
and parachutists. Triumph (Model 143), on the right,
was Scaled Composites’ first jet. It had two FJ-44
turbofans, each providing 1,800 pounds of thrust—a
big step up from the 220 pounds of thrust per engine
for the Microturbo turbojets used by the AD-1 and
NGT. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
84
R
E
V
An agriculture aircraft, Predator (Model 120) had large
hopper, with a capacity of 80 cubic feet, positioned
between the pilot and the engine. Since Predator
had to drop its payload while in flight, losing a large
percentage of weight between takeoff and landing, it
had to balance over a wide range of weights. Thinking
of the payload as extra fuel or a spaceship perhaps,
then Predator would have to have some similar design
considerations in terms of balance as would an aircraft
designed to fly long-range or be a mothership. Courtesy
of Burt Rutan
IE
3.4b.jpg
35%
C
Looking like a missile nosecone fitted with a canard,
sweptback wing, and pusher engine, the Microlight
(Model 97) was designed for Colin Chapman, founder
of Lotus, to be introduced into the microlight weight
class for the British market. It first flew with a small
KFM 109 engine but was planned to be powered by a
new 25-horsepower, 100–pound Lotus engine. Though
design started after the Starship, it was the first vehicle
ever flown by Scaled Composites.
The CM-44 (Model 144) built for California
Microwave was also a milestone for Scaled Composites.
Looking like a Long-EZ with a blunt rectangular-shaped
nose, it was Scaled Composites’ first foray into remotely
piloted vehicles (RPV) or unmanned aerial vehicles
(UAV). However, it could be flown with or without a
pilot. It was designed for military applications and had a
shape that reduced its radar signature. The CM-44 had
a top speed of 195 miles per hour and an eighteen-hour
flight endurance.
Model 133, the Advanced Technology Tactical
Transport (ATTT), also called the Special Mission
Utility Transport (SMUT), was a subscale technology
demonstrator made for the Defense Advanced Projects
3.4A FPO.tif
W
Manned Vehicles:
An Overview
Research Agency (DARPA). The STOL transport was
intended to fill the gap between helicopters and larger
fixed-wing transports.
ARES (Agile Responsive Effect Support), Model 151,
a light attack aircraft, was developed as an inhouse
project by Scaled Composites. With a canard, an inner
wing swept back about 50 degrees, an outer wing swept
back about 15 degrees, and two vertical stabilizers, it
had even more intriguing features. To prevent smoke
being sucked into the engine from a gun mounted on
the right side of the fuselage, it only had a single air
intake that was mounted on the left side of the fuselage.
This resulted in an asymmetric fuselage.
Lima 1 was a program for Toyota to evaluate the use
of a Lexus car engine for general aviation. Flight tested
on one side of a twin engine aircraft, the engine would
eventually be used for a new airplane.
The Pond Racer (Model 158) was designed as an
unlimited class air racer. The intention was to develop
an aircraft that would outcompete the vintage World War
II aircraft that flew in these races so the dwindling stock
of warbirds could be preserved. The Pond Racer looked
like a pod racer from Star Wars. Two giant engines on
2
4
1
7
6
9
3
5
11
8
10
12
14
13
James Linehan
15
Designs from Scaled Composites,
1988 to 1995
1—Earthwinds (Model 181)
2—Raptor D-2 (Model 226-B)
3—B-2 RCS (Model 175)
4—Undisclosed
5—Raptor D-1 (Model 226)
6—Eagle Eye (Model 231)
7—Freewing (Model 233)
8—Lima 2 (Model 191)
9—Searcher
10—Comet
11—DC-X
12—Kistler Zero
13—Ultralite
14—Su-25 ROAR
15—Bladerunner
85
2/3/11 2:30:52 PM
Y
3.4e.jpg
63%
3.4f.jpg
36%
C
O
P
3.4d.jpg
61%
W
3.4k.jpg
67%
Unlike the Raptor D-1 where a test pilot would straddle the aircraft just like a scene out of Dr. Strangelove, the
larger Raptor D-2 (Model 226-B) could actually fit someone inside when configured for manned flight. The D-2
was part of NASA’s Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) program. NASA
IE
were still in their infancy. For the early stages of flight
testing, a pilot actually mounted the Raptor, like a
cowboy rode a horse, to rein it in if things didn’t go right.
Based on a Long-EZ, the Jet LEZ Vantage (Model
61-B) evaluated the Williams FJ107 jet engine. A striking
feature of this design was a square, flat section, as
seen from below, added at the back of the aircraft. The
section wasn’t as wide as the strakes at the front wing
roots but was longer along the fuselage, in comparison.
Developed with the idea of revitalizing the light
aircraft industry by moving from propellers to jets,
the Williams V-Jet II (Model 271) was designed to be
affordable. The aim of this light aircraft was centered
on the use two new “extremely quiet, very low-cost,
lightweight” Williams FJX-2 turbofan jet engines to be
mounted on its V-tail, though the prototype first flew
with less powerful FJX-1 engines.
In the early 1990s, Dick Rutan got into the race
to be the first around the world in a balloon. He had
Scaled Composites design the Global Hilton (Model
257), an eight-foot diameter, carbon fiber composite,
spherical gondola. Like Earthwinds, it would use both
helium and air to maintain altitude while floating along
86
R
E
V
booms extended out in front of the wing with the cockpit
located squarely between them, the wing, and the
horizontal stabilizer.
Using a Lexus five-liter automotive engine with
a turbocharger, Lima 2 (Model 191) was an aircraft
developed for Toyota. Lima 2 was quiet and roomy,
and its propeller turned at 1,900 revolutions per
minute at cruise speed. In comparison to a Bonanza, it
had 2.5 times the range and was 40 knots faster with
the same horsepower.
Earthwinds (Model 181) was a twenty-four-footlong, ten-foot-diameter pressurized gondola for a balloon
designed for Larry Newman’s around-the-world flight
attempt. Richard Branson was an early sponsor before
forming his own team. To balance the lift as it floated
along in the jetstream at around thirty-five thousand
feet, day and night, the gondola was attached between
a helium-filled top balloon and an air-filled anchor
balloon, which hung below.
The Raptor D-1 (Model 226) was designed to study
the possibility of intercepting ballistic missiles at high
altitudes during their boost phase. First flown in May
1993 and intended as an UAV, these types of vehicles
The Williams V-Jet II (Model 271) and the FJX-2
turbofan jet engine were developed with the idea to
provide the basis of a nationwide air taxi service,
similar to the idea of calling for a cab in New York City.
Jim Koepnick/Experimental Aircraft Association
Given a deadline of 16 November 1996, for the first flight, Scaled Composites
had only eight and a half months to build the VisionAire Vantage (Model 247). The
low-cost, high-performance business jet featured forward-swept wings, a single jet
engine, and two air intakes mounted on the fuselage right above the wing. At a max
cruise speed of 403 miles per hour, it could carry a crew of two and four passengers
1,150 miles. Ken Lichtenberg/Experimental Aircraft Association
Because of its very good and well understood flying
qualities, the Long-EZ was used by Scaled Composites
and other companies as a platform for new technology,
especially engine testing. The pod underneath the belly
of Borealis (Model 61-PD) contained mechanisms for
an experimental pulse detonation engine. This engine
generates thrust from supersonic shockwaves that
result from controlled and repetitive explosions of fuel
and air. USAF
87
2/3/11 2:30:55 PM
3.4h.png
100%
W
C
O
P
3.4g.jpg
51%
Y
3.4i.jpg
56%
Long-EZ received its airworthiness in 1987, but the
scope of this project remains proprietary.
Scaled Composites didn’t do the aerodynamic design
of Model 302, the Toyota Advanced Aircraft (TAA-1), but
it did assemble and flight test the aircraft. It had a low
wing, conventional tail, and fixed tricycle landing gear.
The four-seater was powered by a 200–horsepower
Lycoming IO-360.
Designed for and flown by Steve Fossett, with
sponsorship from Richard Branson, GlobalFlyer (Model
311) made three record-breaking round the world,
nonstop, nonrefueled flights between February 2005
and March 2006. A trimaran with a cruciform tail at the
end of each boom, GlobalFlyer had a maximum takeoff
weight of twenty-two thousand pounds; however,
because of the lightweight composite design, the pilot
and aircraft weighed only 3,700 pounds. So on takeoff
an incredible 83 percent of the entire weight was the
fuel it would carry to circumnavigate Earth.
3.4j.jpg
75%
With removable wingtips installed, the tandem-wing
Proteus has a wingspan of 64.7 feet and 92 feet for
its front and rear wing, respectively. Powered by two
FJ-44 turbofans, it has a cruise speed of Mach 0.42
and can reach an altitude of around 65,000 feet. With
an empty weight of 5,900 pounds, Proteus can carry
a payload weighing up to 7,260 pounds. Depending on
the flight profile, it can fly up to 18 hours at a stretch.
NASA
88
R
E
V
in the current of the jetstream. However, the helium
and air would be keep in separate cells within a single
envelope that carried the two-person gondola below.
The Adam 309 (Model 309) was a push-pull twin
designed for very safe handling in the event of an engine
out. It had a bronco tail, which is a twin tail with the
vertical stabilizers on each of the two booms connected
by a horizontal stabilizer. Fabrication techniques allowed
it to be developed in record breaking time for Scaled
Composites, and the company reported, “. . . there are
several major structural components that were produced
as single-cure parts. The outboard wings, horizontal
tail, elevator, rudders, and flaperons had no secondary
bonds in their primary structure. This allows lighter,
stronger, and safer structure due to the significant
elimination of fasteners and secondary bonds.”
The Rodie LEZ (Model 61-R) was based on a
Long-EZ and first flown on August 2001. The aircraft is
currently registered to McDonnell Douglas. The original
IE
Scaled Composites built the shell of Roton, a technology demonstrator that deployed rotor blades for reentry.
Rocket-powered rotor blade tips allowed Roton to hover and take off and land vertically. SpaceShipOne test pilot
Brian Binnie flew Roton before joining Scaled Composites. Roton is now on static display at Legacy Park at the
Mojave Air & Space Port. Mike Massee
Originally designed with telecommunications in mind, the long-range, high-altitude
Proteus (Model 281) has provided a platform for a wide array of applications and
experiments. This workhorse is Scaled Composites’ top flyer, logging between 2,500
and 3,000 flight hours as of 2009. Proteus was also intended to be a spaceship
launcher. NASA
GlobalFlyer had a single Williams FJ-44 turbofan jet engine mounted behind the
single-place cockpit. With a normal cruise speed of 288 miles per hour and normal
cruise altitude of 45,000 feet, GlobalFlyer also made use of the jetstream to boost its
speed as Steve Fossett circled the planet nonstop and without refueling not just once
but on three separate occasions. Dan Luft/Experimental Aircraft Association
89
2/3/11 2:30:58 PM
3.1E FPO.tif
3.5c.jpg
49%
O
P
C
9
3
7
2
8
11
6
5
10
4
14
13
James Linehan
3.5e.gif
8%
12
15
Designs from RAF and Scaled
Composites, 1988 to 2000
1—Catbird (Model 81)
2—Boomerang (Model 202)
3—Nosejob
4—Adam 309 (Model 309)
5—Vantage (Model 247)
6—V-Jet II (Model 271)
7—Proteus (Model 281) with spaceship
8—Alliance (Model 287)
9—Proteus (Model 281) with antenna
10—X-38 (Model 276)
11—Global Hilton (Model 257)
12—PLADS/Rockbox (Model 179)
13—Roton
14—RCS models
15—Orion
3.5d.jpg
35%
E
V
IE
3.5b.gif
9.6%
1
W
Designed to deliver up to a 1,000-pound payload into low earth orbit, the Orbital
Sciences Pegasus made its first flight in 1989. Scaled Composites was contracted
to design and build the wings, fins, and wing-body fairing. Though only a small part
of the rocket, it certainly got Scaled Composites thinking about a winged vehicle that
was air-launched and would fly to space. NASA
Scaled Composites had worked early on with vehicles
that could alternately be manned or unmanned, such
as the CM-44 and Raptor D-1. Its work in the area of
remotely piloted vehicles has steadily continued through
the years.
Two fascinating RPVs, Eagle Eye and Freewing,
were first flown in 1993 and 1994, respectively. The
tilt-rotor demonstrator Eagle Eye built for Bell had a
wingspan of more than fifteen feet, and its two wingtipmounted rotors each had a diameter greater than
nine feet. These rotors to allowed Eagle Eye to lift off
vertically like a helicopter and then rotate so it could
fly like a conventional aircraft. During flight testing after
transitioning from hover to forward flight, Eagle Eye
could hit a speed of 165 knots.
With a nose-mounted 65-horsepower engine and
two opposing L-shaped tails, Freewing had a 16.2-foot
wingspan and an 11.8-foot length. The leading edge of
each side of the wing was connected by a shaft that ran
through the fuselage. The wing was free to rotate along
this shaft, with the trailing edge moving up and down
with respect to the fuselage during flight. This had the
effect of allowing the wing to keep a constant angle of
attack whether it was climbing, maintaining altitude, or
descending. Freewing’s design proved stall resistant,
could ride out wind gusts and turbulence very well, and
could enable short takeoff and landing operation.
Most recently Scaled Composites completed work on
the X-47, an unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV),
for its new parent company, Northrop Grumman. But
Scaled Composites projects haven’t been confined to the
realm of aircraft. Some of the same principles behind
aerospace apply to other technologies that move through
the air.
In 1988, Scaled Composites made 85-foot-tall and
105-foot-tall, rigid-wing sails for the Stars and Stripes
catamaran sailboat to race against a large New Zealand
mono-hull in a special America’s Cup challenge race.
The GM Ultralite concept car was built in 1991 and
unveiled in 1992. Made of ten pieces, the lightweight
composite body of carbon fiber, sandwiched around
a rigid foam, helped reduce the total structural weight
down to an incredibly low 420 pounds. And in 1994,
Scaled Composites designed the rotor blades for the
Zond Z-40 Bladerunner, a wind turbine that had a rotor
diameter of 130 feet.
The one thing all these projects had in common was
the need for a high-technology solution, be it materials,
manufacturing, quick turnaround, or innovation.
Y
The Unmanned
and Nonflying
3.4a.jpg
55%
90
R
Launched horizontally at 40,000 feet, Pegasus had to “turn the corner” and point to
space. For the first stage of the rocket, the wings and fins steered it. This was not too
dissimilar to the flight profile of SpaceShipOne. However, the steering for Pegasus’
next two stages was done by gimbaled rocket engines as it boosted to space faster
than Mach 8. NASA
McDonnell Douglas and NASA worked together on
the Delta Clipper Experimental (DC-X), shown here on
its third landing test in 1996. The DC-X was used to
evaluate a single-stage-to-orbit concept as a potential
low-cost reusable launch vehicle (RLV). For this
concept, a vehicle would use the same rockets to liftoff,
to reach space, and to land. Scaled Composites built
the shell for the DC-X. NASA
The X-38 was designed to stay attached to an airlock
on the International Space Station. If an emergency
arose, up to seven astronauts could board the X-38 and
evacuate. A de-orbit burn would slow down the X-38,
and then it would reenter similarly to the Space Shuttle,
pop a parachute, and extend landing skids. NASA
Right: Dropping off a NASA B-52, this 80 percentscale prototype of the X-38 (Model 276) was making
it eighth—and final—freefall flight test in 2001. The
X-38 was a crew return vehicle (CRV) or emergency
lifeboat for the International Space Station based off
the X-24 lifting body and built by Scaled Composites.
The program was cancelled in 2002. NASA
91
2/3/11 2:31:01 PM
Y
Chapter 4
V
IE
W
C
O
P
4.0.tif
85%
Tom Wolf’s book The Right Stuff chronicled the heyday of x-planes, the x-plane pilots, and
the path of the Mercury Seven—the first American astronauts. In the movie adaption, while
at Pancho’s Happy Bottom Riding Club, the liaison officer asks Chuck Yeager (the real Chuck
Yeager makes one of his cameos as Fred the bartender in this scene) and his flight engineer,
Jack Ridley, “You know what really makes your rocket ships go up?”
“The aerodynamics alone are so complicated—” Ridley
starts to reply.
“Funding. That’s what makes your ships go up. I’ll
tell you something, and you guys, too,” the liaison officer
pulls soon-to-be Mercury astronauts Gus Grissom,
Gordon Cooper, and Deke Slayton into the conversation.
“No bucks, no Buck Rogers. Whoever gets the funding
gets the technology. Whoever gets the technology stays
on top.”
These quotes relate to a substantial challenge that
would have to be solved before any forward progress
could be made. How can getting to space possibly be
done if you are not NASA or some other giant nation
with vast resources of both money and manpower?
SpaceShipOne
While SpaceShipOne in its completed form may look
very beautiful to some, it certainly may not be the most
elegant looking vehicle that Rutan has designed. If,
however, one thinks of design elegance not as a look,
but as an air, not as rich, but as refined, as something
beautifully intricate yet simple, effective, and clever,
SpaceShipOne fits the definition.
To start with, the engineering criteria and
solutions to reach space were really governed by three
fundamental principles. First, SpaceShipOne had to
be cost effective. Bang for the buck may be a better
way of saying it because to reach space you need a
92
R
E
Made of high-strength, low-weight composites, the spindly White Knight and
the stubby SpaceShipOne had design configurations like no other aircraft or
spacecraft. Their far-out shapes seemed like the vehicles were pulled straight
from the pages of science fiction. Tyson V. Rininger
SpaceShipOne and
White Knight:
The Ascension
93
2/3/11 2:31:02 PM
Safety
94
R
E
V
SpaceShipOne had to be safe. This seems like an
obvious thing, but if you are going to ride this thing
and you’re hoping you are developing a spaceship that
other people will buy into and ride, then people can’t
be getting killed all the time or even hurt. Granted, it
is space. There are challenges. Airliners have crashes.
Cars crash every day. Thousands and thousands of
people die in car crashes every year. That’s because
cars are moving fast and there are mechanical parts and
there are human operators. Things are going to happen.
It is just inevitable. However, you have to have a realistic
level of safety. If you scuba dive, mountain climb, or
O
P
C
Can you imagine the cost of an airline ticket if every
airliner was tossed out after each and every flight? The
key to operations is to be able to efficiently reuse systems,
not dispose of them. Certain irreplaceable consumables,
such as propellants, are an obvious exception. The object
is not to replace the whole heat shield, for example, or
throw away the whole first stage of a rocket after a single
use. One-shot systems don’t scale well to large markets.
It would not have been much of a challenge for Burt
Rutan to build a single-use spacecraft.
The idea of reusability is like a car in a garage.
Check the fluids and gas. Check the tire pressure.
Drive back and forth. What if you had to get rid of
your car after every time you took a trip? It wouldn’t be
economical to own a car or to even use a car. By being
able to reuse as much as possible, you have systems in
place where it is essentially plug in the nozzle, squeeze,
fill with the gas, and you’re good to go.
W
Reusability
participate in any other activity that challenges the limits
of the human body in an unforgiving environment, there
is always risk. That will never, ever go away.
If you were to put your key in the car’s ignition
and thought as you drive away from your house, You
know there is a very good chance that I’m never going
to make it back, then very few of us would be driving.
If you take a rocket ride and said, Hmmm, there is a
pretty good chance I won’t make it back alive, then
that would be a system that will struggle to sustain
itself after a couple of accidents. So safety, even at an
experimental level like for SpaceShipOne, was critical.
This does not mean that everything will be perfect
and there won’t be accidents and mishaps. It also
does not mean that everything is a hundred percent
overdesigned with safety factors like putting padding on
everything that doesn’t need to be padded or ridiculous
signs and placards and extras well above and beyond
rational safety measures. It doesn’t mean that at all.
It means that, fundamentally, the design is something
that you feel safe in to go up and come back down.
You would feel it is safe for your family to ride in. For
a builder or an operator or someone with intimate
knowledge of the spaceship, they have a lot more
comfort with it. Those without familiarity need to feel
safe and be safe, though.
Safety must never be compromised just for saving
the bottom line. Once decisions about safety are made
on bottom line only bases, it becomes a slippery slope
where trouble salivates. It is just a matter of time before
trouble takes a huge bite.
Whether Rutan consciously realized or not, or
how far up in front in his mind this was, the success
of SpaceShipOne would dictate the direction of how
commercial space travel would go. If Burt Rutan failed,
then who could do it? That’s a heavy weight.
If you don’t need a spacesuit because you’re not
going to be in space that long, don’t use a space suit.
Is not wearing a spacesuit compromising safety for
cost effectiveness? That is exactly the interconnection
between safety, cost effectiveness, and reusability that
needed to be balanced.
Having a backup parachute system for the whole
vehicle? Redundancies upon redundancies? After a
while, complication inherently can introduce more
problems into the system than it tries to solve.
IE
pretty big bang or a pretty big controlled explosion, as
is the case for a rocket engine. The challenge was not
to overdesign. Do not mistake avoiding overdesign with
flying by the seat of your pants. But if you don’t need all
the bells and whistles to get to the goal you’re trying for,
then don’t put in all the bells and whistles. It just costs
more. It is just more things to manage, more things to
maintain, and something else that can potentially fail,
adding chaos into the whole system. If your car only
needs 87-octane gas, then pumping high-octane gas
into your car is not going to help. It’s just going to cost
more to operate.
Y
4.1e.jpg
76%
Carried aloft by a NASA B-52 and then released in midair like so many of the X-planes before it, the X-15, a winged rocketplane, made two
suborbital spaceflights—both in 1963—with apogees of 65.8 miles and 67.1 miles. Only two years earlier, the first two U.S. manned spaceflights,
which were part of the Mercury program, had flown suborbital spaceflights as well but reached apogees of 116.5 miles and 118.3 miles. NASA
The Birth of a Spacecraft
“I always had the space bug, keep in mind,” Rutan
said. “When did I jump in and do it myself? It came in
a time when I thought I could do it. And it wasn’t with
SpaceShipOne at first. I was going to do a capsule and
launch it from an airplane that did a steep climb and a
parachute recovery.”
When Rutan started sketching out his early ideas
in 1993, he was using ideas that were not truly novel.
There wasn’t much research involved in it. Rockets had
been done before. Shooting a one-man rocket to space
didn’t seem like an advance. It was more of a step back
to him than a step forward, even though the launch
style would not be a traditional ground-launched rocket.
Air launch had been done previously with the winged
X-15 carried by a B-52 mothership. The X-15 did make
suborbital flights above Kármán line, which is the
internationally recognized boundary of space.
• Design out Problems
• Innovation
• Practical Thinking
• Feather
• Air Launch
• Hybrid Rocket Engine
• Cantilever Mounting
• Composite Construction
• Portholes for Windshield
• Hand-Flown
• Front Landing Skid
• Common Construction
• Common Fit Characteristics
Elegance in Engineering
• Size Reduction
• Lightweight
• Multifunctional
• Strong
• Simple
•Efficient
• Reliable
•Economical
• Cost Effective
• Reusable
• Safe
Dan Linehan
95
2/3/11 2:31:03 PM
4.2b.jpg
76%
Ansari X Prize
IE
W
C
In 1996, underneath the top of the shiny St. Louis
arch, Peter Diamandis announced the running of the
most ambitious, exciting, adventurous, and elevating
competition since the space race between the
Americans verses the Russians. It certainly wasn’t as
large as the superpowers duking it out. However, in
terms of the potential for people to actually participate in
a space program, it certainly was a giant leap.
Diamandis received his aerospace engineering
degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and
went on to study space medicine while getting his MD
at Harvard University. He was obsessed with space
but also felt paralyzed because there was little to no
chance of him ever having an opportunity to become an
astronaut for NASA. There were just too many people
trying for too few spots.
Space captivated his imagination, and he wanted
to be able to fly to space not just once or twice in a
Above: Inspired by the effect that aviation prizes had
on the growth of the aviation industry, Peter Diamandis
sought to use this as a model to foster commercial
space travel. He conceived of a competition that would
have people building their own spaceships for a race to
space with a $10 million prize waiting back on Earth.
Dan Linehan
V
4.2c.jpg
116%
R
E
Left: In order to win the Ansari X Prize, a spacecraft
had to pass the threshold of space, which was set at
62 miles above the surface of Earth. In comparison,
an airliner flies about 7 miles up and the International
Space Station orbits about 200 miles up. Only a
suborbital spaceflight was required, but the spacecraft
had to make the trip twice. X PRIZE Foundation
96
Y
4.2a.jpg
79%
O
P
There is probably nothing more that Rutan likes than
to compete and have a challenge with a target in his
sights. Especially, if someone says it can’t be done. After
the announcement of the visionary Ansari X Prize, as
aviation prizes had done in the past, it fueled, sparked,
and set the bar for competition at space height.
However, it was Rutan’s decades of experience
in aerospace, his mind for innovation, and adaptable
approach to engineering that enabled him to balance
practicality with out-of-the-box thinking. Individual
systems such as the revolutionary feather reentry or
the seemingly insignificant nose skid exemplified this
process, making SpaceShipOne the epitome of elegance
in design.
decade. He wanted to be able to fly his spaceship up to
space when he wanted, the stuff science fiction is made
out of.
It really wasn’t that long ago when Robert Goddard,
the father of American rocketry, suggested that a rocket
could be built big enough to reach the Moon, and his
peers ridiculed him for such folly and fanciful thought.
Four decades later, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin
circled Earth in orbit in his space capsule. Only eight
years after that, American astronaut Neil Armstrong
stepped onto the Moon.
“We needed a paradigm shift,” Diamandis said.
“People had become so stuck in their way of thinking
that spaceflight was only for the government—only the
largest corporations and governments could do this—it
could never be done by an individual. This thinking
was paralyzing us, and that was what I was trying
to change.”
After reading The Spirit of St. Louis by Charles
Lindbergh, Diamandis found inspiration on an
Flying the Spirit of St. Louis from Long Island, New
York, to Paris, France, Charles Lindbergh made the
first nonstop transatlantic flight pursuing the $25,000
Orteig Prize in 1927. Before making this historic flight,
he had little idea how far reaching his achievement
would become. Lindbergh would never have imagined
that three-quarters of a century later, his solo flight
would provide the motivation for spaceflight. NASA
97
2/3/11 2:31:04 PM
4.2h.jpg
100%
Lone Star Space Access
American Astronautics
4.2i.jpg
100%
Fundamental Technology
4.2f.jpg
100%
Interorbital Systems
4.2l.jpg
100%
4.2g.jpg
100%
Pablo de León and Associates Corp.
Discraft Corporation
4.2k.jpg
100%
TGV Rockets Systems
Rocketplane Limited, Inc.
W
The Ansari X Prize drew competitors from Argentina, Canada, England, Israel, Romania, Russia, and the United States.
Twenty-six teams in total, their concepts ranged from nearly every type of spacecraft imaginable. Getting to space still proved
to be quite a tough challenge, so only a few teams were able to successfully test launch hardware. X PRIZE Foundation
People had to be infected again with the space
craze. So on that day at the silvery Gateway to the
West, in the city that was the namesake for Lindbergh’s
aircraft, the arch became a portal, an opening to the age
of commercial space travel.
IE
The Rules
The prize had to be hard enough that only serious
contenders would consider it. Yet, it had to be
something remotely achievable. One of the ways was to
set up a system of rules that were not just a checklist
but would actually help focus and encourage the type
of research and spacecraft that would help Diamandis’
vision come to fruition.
Had it not been for the tough rules, building a
vehicle to get into space would not have necessarily
been too difficult a technical challenge. If the sole
purpose is just to get someone up and down safely
and if someone’s giving you $10 million to do it, then,
with some ingenuity, it doesn’t really cost that much
using technology that was first developed in
the 1940s.
In fact, England’s Starchaser, one of the Ansari X
Prize competitors, wasn’t very far off of getting a single
person into space. Another competitor, Canada’s Red
Arrow, based its spacecraft on Germany’s V2 rocket, the
very first human-made object to reach the edge of space
way, way back in 1943.
98
R
E
V
astronomic scale. The autobiographical book chronicled
Lindbergh’s winning of the Orteig Prize in 1927 as
he became the first person to fly across the Atlantic,
nonstop from New York to Paris. This was an incredible
feat back then, considering aviation still was in its
infancy. Airplanes crashed and pilots died as they tried
to win this prize, which happened a lot during the prize
flights of the early age of aviation.
No one could win the Orteig Prize at first, so it had
to be reissued. Flying across the Atlantic nonstop from
New York to Paris was unthinkable. Orbiting Earth was
unthinkable. Landing on the Moon was unthinkable.
And if the pioneers and visionaries would have just sat
there and said, Yeah, you’re right. Public opinion says
it’s unreachable, undoable, unfathomable. Why even
try?, we wouldn’t have the first Moon landing, now more
than four decades ago. That was just not the kind of
future that Diamandis had believed in.
There are now generations of people who have
never known that at one time it was impossible to
land on the Moon. After reading Lindbergh’s book,
Diamandis understood what it would take to change this
way of thinking. And it really wasn’t such a new idea.
Competitions and races and prizes have been challenging
people from athletics to technology to other types of
advancements and, in a way, to our survival ever since
the dawn of humankind. But the application and the
execution of his idea was like lifting off to space itself.
Sending a single person into space as a one-time
shot was not really much of a big deal. But if you were
trying for commercialization, to make it affordable and
sustainable, then you certainly couldn’t afford to be
sending people up one at a time on a disposable rocket.
First off, as far as the rules went, how high would a
team have to go for this new space prize?
Teams had to pass the threshold of space known
as the Kármán line, which is the boundary determined
by physicist Theodore von Kármán, who also helped
unravel the mysteries of the sound barrier. At one
hundred kilometers (62.1 miles or 328,000 feet),
this was also what the Fédération Aéronautique
Internationale, the international organization that governs
aerospace records, accepted as the start of space.
The spacecraft would have to carry three people.
This was to ensure that there was room to take
passengers. After all, what good was a spacecraft for
commercial space travel with only a pilot and no room
for passengers?
The next rule was that the spacecraft had to be
flown twice in the span of two weeks. This meant the
spacecraft had to be built in such a way that it was
robust and durable and strong and tough enough to
make the flight more than once. It couldn’t be juryrigged or duct-taped together to barely make it to space
just once. The spacecraft had to go through two cycles,
not just one.
Next was that only a minimal amount of the
spacecraft could be replaced. Of course, the propellant
had to be refueled. But for everything else, 90 percent
had to be intact and could not be changed out. This
forced systems that were reusable.
The spacecraft also had to be funded by
nongovernment sources. If the goal was to stimulate
commercial space travel, it’d be the commercial space
industry that would be running the show.
And the most important rule, the crew had to be
safe and sound during the launches and landings and
everything in between.
Y
4.2d.jpg
100%
O
P
Acceleration Engineering
4.2j.jpg
100%
C
4.2e.jpg
100%
4.2p.jpg
100%
Canadian Arrow
4.2n.jpg
100%
ARCA
4.2q.jpg
100%
IL Aerospace Technologies
4.2m.jpg
100%
Advent Launch Services
The Teams
Competition was only as good as its competitors. In
order for success, the field not only needed visionaries
but entrepreneurs and competent talent. There also
needed to be a very attractive incentive to spur their
interest. Offering $10 million was quite a carrot. Back
when Lindbergh won the Orteig Prize, the prize money
amounted to $25,000, yet all the competitors combined
spent $400,000 in pursuit of it.
The amazing leveraging of all this investment ignited
the aviation industry. An aviation explosion—the Lindbergh
boom—followed in talent, technology, capability, interest,
and opportunity. So as important as it was to have a prize
winner to ignite this new commercial space industry, it
was equally important that the $10 million purse be force
multiplied into an even greater economic punch.
“We probably turned away about half the
applications we received,” explained Diamandis.
“We required the teams to really demonstrate to us
the seriousness of their team and effort. They had to
demonstrate by virtue of the people who were involved,
the companies who were involved, and they had to
show us the primary concept.
“We had numerous teams apply with antigravity and
UFO technology. My answer was simple: ‘My office is on
4.2o.jpg
100%
Armadillo Aerospace
4.2r.jpg
100%
Suborbital Corporation
To get to space, teams competing for the Ansari X Prize conceived of rockets, rocketplanes,
and even a saucer-shaped spacecraft, which would ride the blastwaves of pulsejets. Some
of these concepts would launch from the ground, but some would be carried to launch
altitude on top or below aircraft, behind tow aircraft, or underneath giant balloons. Reentry
and descent covered an equally wide range of methods. X PRIZE Foundation
99
2/3/11 2:31:05 PM
4.2s.jpg
82%
In 2001, Diamandis read a profile about Ansari in
Fortune magazine, where she had expressed “her desire
to board a civilian-carrying, suborbital shuttle.”
“I read that like three times,” Diamandis said. “So I
convinced myself that it really said suborbital flight.”
Diamandis arranged a meeting with Ansari and her
bother-in-law, Amir Ansari, who was also enthusiastic
about space travel.
“From the first moment we sat across the table and
started to talk about it, Peter had us sold,” Anousheh
Ansari said.
Although she backed the prize starting in 2002,
it wasn’t until May 2004 that Ansari became the title
sponsor. “Our sponsorship was absolutely needed for X
Prize to succeed,” she noted.
“At the time we joined the organization, if we had
decided not to, I don’t know if they would have survived.
We felt that we couldn’t let that happen. This was too
valuable. It was difficult to put together such a good
group of people again. The momentum was right. We
couldn’t just let it go. And at the same time, the reason
we did it was because we love flying to space. And it
wasn’t like I want to do it just once, and we knew there
were millions of people around the world that felt the
same way. We wanted to do something to help build an
industry, so this would become something that would be
available, and you can do it again and again and again.”
The prize money would ultimately be paid by a holein-one insurance policy. In return for very expensive
monthly payments, an insurance company bet against
anyone winning the Ansari X Prize.
Ansari recalls people thinking she was nuts to be
supporting all this spaceship stuff. After a bit of luck or
maybe it was just good karma, she would then have
an opportunity to go to space even before her ride on a
suborbital spaceship. She held steadfast to her dreams,
and in 2006 when an opportunity opened up for her to
ride a Soyuz to the International Space Station, she was
more than ready to don a space helmet.
IE
the second floor. If you can float up to the second floor,
I’m happy to register you.’ ”
Twenty-six teams, spanning the globe, took on
the challenge. Argentina, Canada, England, Israel,
Romania, Russia, and the United States all fielded
teams, and their vehicles and their launch methods
and their return methods were as varied as in a
Saturday-morning cartoon.
Some teams didn’t make it much further than the
paper application, but some did launch hardware,
sometimes successfully and sometimes explodingly.
“The biggest challenge was, I guess, raising the
finances, because the technology to do this kind of
thing has been around since the 1950s, possibly even
the 1940s,” said Steve Bennett of Starchaser. His team
had to be creative. Back in 2000, they had pre-sold
two of the seats for when they would first attempt the
Ansari X Prize.
Bennett said of the two prospective passengers,
“They wanted to basically support the project. And
they wanted to fly on the first flight. We got three seats
in the capsule. The only condition they made was,
‘Here’s the money, Steve. We’ll give you the money.
The Prize Money
Running a highly technical prize that had merit, prestige,
and integrity was not inexpensive to do by any stretch.
And to raise $10 million in prize money would prove
nearly as tough as it was to get into space.
At a time when the prize looked like it would not
get off the pad, Anousheh Ansari stepped in. Ansari
was born in Iran and always dreamed of one day
becoming an astronaut. At sixteen, she immigrated to
the United States then learned English. After earning
her college degree, she helped found a multimilliondollar company. After all this time, though, space was
never far from her mind.
100
R
E
V
Ever since she was a young child, Anousheh Ansari
dreamed about becoming an astronaut. She had
been following the progress of the X Prize, but later
Ansari and her family would become the title sponsor.
However, in 2006, even before her chance to ride a
suborbital spaceship, she got the opportunity to fly
aboard a Russian Soyuz to the International Space
Station. Prodea Systems, Inc.
W
C
O
P
Y
We’ll give it to you up front, and we’re not even going
to come back to you. We don’t care whether it takes
a year or ten years. You tell us when it’s ready. We’re
not going to hassle you. There is only one condition.’
And the one condition was the third seat had to
be occupied by me. Okay. So they knew I wasn’t a
nutcase. They knew that I wanted to do this project
and that I wanted to come home to my family.”
Some even got close enough to announce that
they were going to make an attempt, as with Brian
Feeney’s da Vinci Project out of Canada. But ultimately
the funding was too difficult to secure, especially since
SpaceShipOne had made one trip into space already.
It certainly made it hard to bet against Rutan and
Scaled Composites with their track record of safety,
development of many types of flying vehicles, and
work on space projects. Feeney had a successfully
tested a scaled-down version of his team’s launch
system, which was a gigantic helium balloon. But
their spacecraft, a rocket called Wildfire, was only 80
percent complete.
A big chunk of money came from an internet
gambling company. But it wasn’t the jackpot haul the
da Vinci Project would need to run with Rutan and
Scaled Composites.
101
2/3/11 2:31:06 PM
Y
O
P
W
4.3c.tif
53%
4.3d_4.3e.tif
50%
IE
With the announcement of the Ansari X Prize and its rule requiring
a crew of three, Burt Rutan created a concept for a spacecraft that
could carry three people. This design was still a rocket, though. The
capsule would return with a parachute, but instead of a water landing
like NASA’s manned capsules, Rutan intended for it to be snagged
in midair. The protuberances on the capsule were designed to slow
down the capsule during reentry. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
Based on all his experience with winged vehicles, Rutan then moved
from rocket to rocketplane concepts. This model used a large speed
brake and two large elevons for reentry. However, this design was
abandoned because it could not fly both subsonically and supersonically
without a complicated and expensive flight control system. Mojave
Aerospace Ventures, LLC / SpaceShipOne: A Paul G. Allen Project
R
102
Landing Method
C
The original launch concept, from 1995, showed how Burt Rutan
planned to fire a one-person rocket from Proteus to space. Proteus
would perform a zoom maneuver, swooping down and then pitching
its nose up, to aim the spaceship upward. The spaceship would
detach, fire its rocket engine, and head to space. Mojave Aerospace
Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
E
The Ansari X Prize had its rules, and the rules created
constraints. For Burt Rutan this was no different than a
customer having specific design requirements. And since one
of the rules specified that the spacecraft must carry three
people, then obviously the single-person rocket Rutan had
originally envisioned would not work. For the next iteration,
he designed a rocket to hold three people, which would be
much greater in weight. This rocket would be too heavy for
Proteus to heft. His three-person rocket was getting closer
and closer to the status quo.
Either doing a ground launch or using a much larger
lifting vehicle were Rutan’s options. SpaceShipOne wouldn’t
be funded by the bankroll of a nation. But on the flipside,
the performance requirements and its objectives were
certainly much less than that required by the Space Shuttle
or the Apollo, Gemini, and Mercury missions. Even the early
suborbital Mercury missions flew nearly twice as high as
SpaceShipOne would.
This was where cost effectiveness came in. One of the
first things that really helped begin to shape the design of
SpaceShipOne was if it ground launched, it was going to be
much more expensive in terms of having to build a spacecraft
that was bigger in order to carry enough fuel to bring it all the
way from the ground to space.
Additional safety precautions would be needed in case
SpaceShipOne had an accident or a catastrophic failure on the
launch pad. A complicated and expensive system to get the
crew out of harm’s way would have to be used because there
would be only fractions of a second to react if such a problem
arose. Whereas with an air launch, if the problem sprung up,
then the spaceship would be at launch altitude. And altitude
equals time. During this period, the pilot could troubleshoot
and decide whether to bail out or ride it out.
Rutan never really considered ground launch a viable
option. It was clear then that a bigger launch aircraft
was needed.
Rutan now had a large rocket trying to launch off of an
aircraft horizontally. It takes an awful lot of energy for a
rocket to make a turn from horizontal to vertical.
The idea of doing a zoom maneuver with Proteus had been
considered for the single-person rocket, where the lifting
aircraft would point down to pick up speed and then pitch up,
angling the rocket upward but no way near close to vertical.
Other ideas included the use of the drogue chute, a parachute
to orient the rocket upward after being released where it
could fire off vertically.
But when he came down to it, Rutan had the most
experience with airplanes—vehicles with wings. A winged
spaceship would even provide a little extra lift for the
mothership, compared to if the mothership was toting a
rocket of the same weight.
4.3a_4.3b.tif
100%
V
Adapting on the Fly
4.4a.JPG
85%
Above: After the Apollo program completed in 1972, the Space Shuttle, entering
service in 1981, took over manned spaceflight for NASA. A fleet of six Space Shuttles
were constructed: Enterprise was used for flight testing; Challenger and Columbia
were lost during accidents; and Atlantis, Discovery, and Endeavor will all have been
retired by 2011. Dan Linehan
After reentry, there are three main methods to get
back on the ground: parachutes, powered descent and
landing, and gliding. Parachutes were used by all of
the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs. Powered
descent and landing has been relegated more to R&D
at this point. But there is a lot of interest and activity
by companies exploring this technology in order to
use it effectively and efficiently. Gliding has been used
successfully by the Space Shuttle and, even before it,
with the X-15.
When you think of the systems involved in each
of these three types, there are some big drawbacks to
some of these approaches that end up being quite a
big expense.
A parachute does seem like the simplest way. A
spaceship basically pops the shoot and floats down to
the surface. The problem with a parachute is you don’t
have a controllable landing. You don’t know exactly
where you are going to land.
For all the rocket-based space programs of the
United States, they all parachuted into the water. In
this type of landing, the water helps absorb some of
the shock. But the spaceship is out in the middle of the
ocean. You have to contend with the recovery aspects
and with all the manpower required to make sure you
get your astronauts and spaceship back safely. Once it’s
reeled in from the water, now you have all the expense
incurred to get the spaceship back home. On top of that,
you have the corrosive aspect of the seawater, possibly
destroying sensitive components. So it makes reusability
a very big challenge.
In early design concepts by Rutan, he did consider
doing a parachute return because the vehicle was quite
simple and small. He felt that it would be a possibility
just to snag the vehicle out of the air by an airplane
or helicopter.
4.4b.jpg
44%
Right: The Space Shuttle ground-launched and used air resistance as it entered the
atmosphere from space to decelerate. A ceramic tile heat shield protected the Space
Shuttle from the immense heat buildup as it hit the atmosphere at Mach 25. After
reentry, it descended as a glider and then landed on the runway. This photograph
shows an air-launch of Enterprise during the Space Shuttle’s flight test program.
Former NASA and Scaled Composites test pilot, Fitz Fulton, flew the 747 for some of
these test flights. NASA
103
2/3/11 2:31:07 PM
4.4c.jpg
81%
Y
4.4d.pdf
69%
53 nm
100 km
Pilot earns
astronaut wings
O
P
SpaceShipOne
Flight
IE
This was very similar to a way early spy satellites
used to operate. They didn’t have the telemetry to
communicate back and forth the way we have now.
So when a spy satellite went up to space, it shot film.
No one could see the images until the film came back
to Earth and was developed. These satellites, after the
shooting the film, would eject a film canister. It would fall
to Earth, pop a parachute, and an airplane would come
by and catch it in midair. But film canisters were relatively
small objects. They weren’t anywhere near the size or the
weight of a one-, two-, or three-person space capsule.
Using a spacecraft that has its own power to
maneuver after it returns into the atmosphere does solve
the problem of being able to maneuver back to where
you want the vehicle to end up. So you are obviously
avoiding a lot of the cost in transportation and resources
for recovery. However, it is an enormously wasteful
process because you are spending a lot of energy to
actually lift propellant to space that won’t be used until
after reenty. And that is hugely expensive to do.
It’s not just the mass of the extra propellant needed
after reentry. Now you need additional propellant to
104
R
E
V
The White Knight mothership lifted SpaceShipOne
to a launch altitude of 47,000 feet, clear above 85
percent of the atmosphere. This added a big margin of
safety, compared to ground-launching, in the event of
a malfunction during the ignition of the rocket engine.
The spacepilot in SpaceShipOne had altitude, which
equals time, to troubleshoot or decide to bailout. Jim
Koepnick/Experimental Aircraft Association
W
C
weightless
entry
boost
glide
80,000 ft
U2 Spy Plane
75,000 ft.
747 Airliner
45,000 ft.
50,000 ft
White Knight
Apache Helicopter
15,895
35 nm
compensate for this additional weight. With all that
additional propellant, there needs to be more room
for it in the spaceship. The additional room requires
the spaceship to be bigger. So all your structures and
systems have to accommodate this extra weight that
now themselves require additional propellant, not just to
lift but also to slow down. So this compounding mass
makes it a very expensive method for returning from
space. There is just no way around it.
The optimum way to return to Earth is to let gravity
do the work. Yes, the parachute does do that. But if you
could let gravity do the work and get you back to the
point where you want at the same time, then that really
SpaceShipOne’s suborbital spaceflight could be broken
down into ten different phases.
1. Liftoff of SpaceShipOne mated to White Knight
2. Captive-carry to launch altitude
3. SpaceShipOne separation from White Knight
4. Supersonic boost to space
5. Coast to apogee
6. Freefall from apogee
7. Supersonic reentry into the atmosphere
8. Descent with feather still up
9. Gliding descent back to runway
10.Horizontal landing
Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a
Paul G. Allen Project
105
2/3/11 2:31:08 PM
4.4g.jpg
85%
Y
Angle at Full
Feather Extension
O
P
65°
60°
Angle of Attack
Direction SS1
is Descending
Above: When deployed, the feather extended to a fixed angle of 65 degrees prior to
reentry into Earth’s atmosphere. As SpaceShipOne descended, it came down nearly
flat on its belly. However, it didn’t fall straight down but came down moving forward
at an angle of attack of 60 degrees. James Linehan
Opposite: An air-actuated piston on each side of the fuselage raised and lowered the
feather, as shown. Having this pair was a redundancy because either one could lift and
retract the feather by itself. The same was true with the L-shaped feather lock, one of
which is visible in this photograph. A piston on either side could unlock and lock the
feather. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
C
The Feather Concept
The ah-hah moment or the key to the development of
SpaceShipOne boiled down to one single discovery—the
feather system used for reentry. This put everything in
motion for Burt Rutan. He was now ready to execute his
ideas, dreams, and designs for space. Rutan had known
that he could not move forward with the project until the
problem of reentry was solved.
Up until this point, the modeling work that had
been going on with initial concepts of SpaceShipOne
had not been yielding very good results. One such
model had big speed brakes to slow it down. This
design had the ability to work subsonically or
supersonically, but not both. SpaceShipOne would
have to operate both below the speed of sound and
well above the speed of sound. Rutan then developed
the idea of the feather, where the whole back half of the
4.4e.jpg
54%
W
solves a bunch of problems. It becomes a heck of a
lot cheaper, and that is exactly what the Space Shuttle
did. It glided back home. There were no extra engines
or extra propellant. It was just a matter of coming
down. And that was the system that SpaceShipOne
used—gliding. If a vehicle is designed such that it has a
substantial glide range, then it can also accommodate a
return after poor trajectory or being far off course.
A spaceship that glides home can be built smaller,
which is cheaper to construct and cheaper to operate.
The need for an expansive and expensive recovery
procedure is also eliminated.
Below: Both the right side and the left side tail booms rose during the feather
maneuver, but they didn’t act independently. As a way to reduce complexity and
improve structural integrity, the feather was constructed as a unified piece. 2004
Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
106
R
E
V
IE
4.4f.jpg
57%
107
2/3/11 2:31:11 PM
Thermal Protection System
O
P
C
A group of businessmen from St. Louis, Missouri,
funded Charles Lindbergh for his solo flight across the
Atlantic Ocean to claim the Orteig Prize.
They said to him, in essence, Look, Slim, we’ll make
sure you’ve got the money you need. All you have to
worry about is designing, building, and flying an airplane
to make the flight. We trust you. We won’t interfere.
Not only did Lindbergh very much appreciate this
type of hands-off support, it also turned out vital to his
success. He then could focus on what he needed to do,
which was hard enough already. Funding turned out to
be gigantic distractions for some of the other competitors
who were considered the favorites and frontrunners.
They, otherwise, would have been able to fly even
before Lindbergh made his attempt.
4.5a.jpg
75%
W
The locking mechanism used the same type of idea. It was
a single unified lock structure, but engaged at either side of
the fuselage. So SpaceShipOne couldn’t get into the position
of having one lock disengage while the other lock didn’t. This
eliminated that failure source as well.
The locking mechanism had two independent actuating
systems, on the left side and on the right side of the fuselage.
Each of these independent systems was capable of actuating
both locks at the same time. In the event the actuator failed,
SpaceShipOne had redundancy. So it would have to have both
independent systems fail not to be able to unlock and lock
the feather.
The same setup was used for the actuators that raised and
lowered the feather. Again, there was an independent left
and right system, and each was capable of lifting the entire
feather tail section up and lowering it down without the other.
This was a very important redundancy. These actuators were
the same type of part used by White Knight for its landing
gear. Defects or systematic problems could be detected before
SpaceShipOne ever flew. This gave a very good feeling of
confidence and reliability, which didn’t hurt for such a vital
part of SpaceShipOne.
The actuators, which were pneumatic pistons used for both
the locking mechanism and the feather mechanism, were
powered by compressed air. The source of the compressed air
for SpaceShipOne came from six pressure bottles. Each side’s
actuators fed off a separate pressure bottle. And each of these
pressure bottles could be crossed over to supply the other side.
Each pressure bottle could also feed both sides at the same
time. So if there was a pressure bottle failure, the pilot had
several backups. The compressed air was also used to actuate
as many common systems as possible.
Because SpaceShipOne decelerated so quickly and so
high up in the atmosphere, there wasn’t much time for it
to heat up. The air was relatively thin here, so heat had
little time to conduct from the air molecules outside to
the skin of SpaceShipOne. As a matter of fact, Rutan had
stated that the thermal protection measures were needed
more on the boost stage when SpaceShipOne was going
above Mach 3 in a denser air compared to the reentry.
SpaceShipOne’s thermal protection system consisted
of a combination of high-temperature resistant resin
added to the composite at critical locations and a
painted-on ablative coating. Showing up as red paint,
this ablative coating was made of plastic that steals
away the heat generated outside the spaceship by
forming chemical reactions as it burns off.
to raise and lower it. There was no steering required.
There was no fine tuning of the feather’s angle. The pilot
activated it before reentry, deactivated it before gliding,
and that was it.
Another benefit was the feather could self-right
SpaceShipOne. So the spaceship could be coming from
space upside down, but as it settled into the upper
atmosphere and the air pressure against it started
creating drag, SpaceShipOne would reorient belly first
and steadied itself in that position.
This happens very much like the way a badminton
birdie moves through the air after it is struck by a racket.
The knobby head quickly turns into the direction of flight
as it rapidly slows down.
SpaceShipOne was so stable in the feathered
configuration that the pilot could hardly pitch the nose
up or down. However, he could easily rotate on its belly,
moving the nose right and left.
108
R
E
V
wings, including the outboard tail sections, folded nearly
straight up like the shape of an “L.”
The feather system achieved tremendous benefits
in one simple design. This was a truly elegant solution.
First was the fact that SpaceShipOne decelerated very
quickly in the high atmosphere because of the drag.
SpaceShipOne would not encounter significant heat
buildup. The feather forced SpaceShipOne to fall belly
first. It was like using a giant parachute because of
the cross-section. Instead of the aerodynamic shape
of the pointy end going head-on into the airstream,
SpaceShipOne had its belly and half its wings—the
parts with the most cross-section—in the airstream.
This was a huge difference in drag compared to the
head-on orientation.
The second benefit was that the feather operated
completely hands free. The pilot only had to use one
lever to lock and unlock the feather and another lever
IE
The feather was SpaceShipOne’s ticket home. If it failed to
deploy, SpaceShipOne would see significantly higher loads
and heating on reentry, possibly damaging its structure and
overheating its leading edges. Its function required very
special thought, but so did how it was built and operated.
It is unknown what the condition of SpaceShipOne would
have been if it tried reentry into the atmosphere without
deploying the feather. It would not be good no matter what.
But could SpaceShipOne actually survive without deploying
the feather? Would its composite structure, which was held
together by epoxy, just melt from the heat generated during
reentry?
“No, it would not melt, just damage the first ply or two
of structure, requiring repair,” Rutan said. “We do not know
for sure if it could survive a feather-down entry. It would
require testing that would be a lot more extensive than our
test program. For example, it likely would be strong enough,
but it might flutter, which would be catastrophic. The feather
allows a flight envelope that has very low loads, thus a far less
risky test/validation program. We opened up and cleared the
operating envelope for feathered entry only. It is true that a
feather-down entry would reach past max Q, but max Q is what
the testing qualified. The real max Q might be much higher.”
The feather system relied on unified construction. The
outboard tail booms were connected together to form a
single piece. It was impossible for one side of the tail to go
up without the other. SpaceShipOne could never end up in a
position where one side moves and the other doesn’t move in
exactly the same way. The back halves of the wings were built
around the tail boom structure, so they were tied together
as well. This construction eliminated a huge failure mode
altogether.
Funding
Y
Construction of the Feather
Shown after the first spaceflight of SpaceShipOne, investor and philanthropist Paul
Allen (left) and aircraft designer Burt Rutan (right) had formed a partnership called
Mojave Aerospace Ventures in 2001 to develop a privately funded space program.
Tyson V. Rininger
109
2/3/11 2:31:12 PM
Y
4.5b.jpg
93%
C
O
P
stuck out his hand to shake on the deal. Allen’s
company Vulcan (a clue to Allen’s sci-fi roots?) and
Scaled Composites finalized a partnership called Mojave
Aerospace Ventures in 2001.
Allen put up approximately $25 million.
“There were two ways for me to recoup my
investment,” Allen said. “One was the winning of the X
Prize, and one was the licensing we’d be able to achieve
with a company like Virgin Galactic. Those were the
possible future mechanisms of payment back when
we were evaluating all this stuff. You didn’t necessarily
assume you were going to win. And you didn’t know
what the other competition was like.”
When Doug Shane, the new president of Scaled
Composites, looked back at all the key factors to the
success of SpaceShipOne, he said, “It starts with a
customer. We didn’t have a customer in this case. We
had a sponsor. They wanted us to accomplish a goal.
And they didn’t care how we did it. They trusted us to
figure out how to do it and learn along the way. And that
was amazing.”
Tier One had six main components: the suborbital
spacecraft SpaceShipOne, the spacecraft launch
system White Knight, the test stand trailer (TST) used
to develop the rocket engine, the mobile nitrous oxide
delivery system (MONODS) used to store nitrous oxide
and fill the oxidizer tank, the portable ground control
Scaled Composites unit mobile (SCUM) truck, and the
flight simulator developed specifically for the program,
which is not shown here. Mojave Aerospace Ventures,
LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
IE
For Paul Allen, he’d wondered if he would ever have
the opportunity to take part in a space-related initiative.
Allen was also such a science fiction fan that he built
the Science Fiction Museum in Seattle, Washington.
But as the cofounder of Microsoft, he was also pretty
serious about technology. As a kid, he read sci-fi, built
model rockets, and watched Mercury, Gemini, and
Apollo launches on television at school. “When the
SpaceShipOne opportunity came up, I was very excited
to pursue it.”
Burt Rutan had been brainstorming about a
spaceship since 1993, but he had a big problem to solve
before seeking funding. He had to figure out how to get
his spaceship back from space safely through reentry.
“My first couple of meetings with Paul were not
about space at all,” recalled Rutan. “There was an
interest that he had in something else I was doing. It
was related to Proteus for telecommunications.” Rutan
had been unaware of how much of a big space and
science fiction fan Allen was.
When Rutan discovered that the feather would work,
he approached Allen. In 2000, he told Allen that he
could indeed make a spacecraft. Paul Allen immediately
110
R
E
V
In 2001, construction began on SpaceShipOne (Model
316) and White Knight (Model 318) under the secret
program name of Tier One. Burt Rutan had categorized
projects as Tier One, Tier Two, and Tier Three in terms
of their fun factor, with Tier One being the most fun. He
wanted to make a statement that the SpaceShipOne
program would be the most fun of all, so he called
it Tier One. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
W
4.5c.jpg
100%
111
2/3/11 2:31:13 PM
112
Fuel
Pumps
4.6b.jpg
107%
Throat
Combustion
Chamber
Oxidizer
O
P
Exhaust
Nozzle
Solid Rocket Engine
Throat
Flame Front
Combustion
Chamber
C
Exhaust
Oxidizer and Fuel
Combination
Nozzle
Hybrid Rocket Engine
Injector
Flame Front
Y
Liquid Rocket Engine
Throat
Oxidizer
Fuel
Combustion
Chamber
Nozzle
4.6c.jpg
100%
V
IE
The three main rocket engine types are liquid, solid,
and hybrid. Each requires a fuel and an oxidizer. The
states of these propellants are what distinguish the
rocket engine types. Both liquid and hybrid rocket
engines have their fuel and oxidizer separated prior to
ignition. However, a solid rocket engine has its fuel and
oxidizer premixed. James Linehan
W
Exhaust
This cutaway of the SpaceShipOne fuselage shows
the position of the cockpit on the left, the oxidizer
tank in the center, and the case/throat/nozzle (CTN)
assembly mounted on the right side oxidizer tank.
Called cantilever mounting, the connection between the
oxidizer tank and the CTN was the only place the rocket
engine attached to SpaceShipOne. Mojave Aerospace
R
Burt Rutan did not have much experience with
rocket engines. He spent a significant amount of time
researching the best engine to use for SpaceShipOne.
Two types of rocket engines were most often used in
spacecraft: rocket engines with solid-based propellant
and those with liquid-based propellant.
The propellant of all combustion-based rocket
engines must contain a fuel and an oxidizer. The
chemical reaction that creates the thrust for a rocket
engine is just like the chemical reaction when wood (the
fuel) burns in air (the oxidizer). The combustion reaction
expels hot gas out the end and causes the reactionary
movement of the spacecraft. So exhaust gas goes out
one direction and the rest of the spaceship goes in the
opposite direction.
One of these rocket types was very easy to eliminate
as a possibility. Solid rockets have the fuel and the
oxidizer premixed. Light the fuse, and the rocket engine
burns. It does not stop burning until all propellant has
been consumed. This, by far, is the simplest type and
the cheapest type of rocket engine. The propellant
mixture makes it a very efficient rocket engine as well.
This all satisfied the cost-effective element and
addressed reusability because only the propellant would
be replaced, as with the solid rocket boosters (SRB)
from the Space Shuttle. The SRBs parachuted back after
a launch and were refurbished and refueled.
However, safety turns out to be the biggest
disadvantage in the case of the solid rocket engine. Note
that the SRBs were not even directly attached to the
Space Shuttle and could be easily jettisoned.
Imagine if you were in a flight test program, you
lit a solid rocket engine off, and something did not go
as planned. The vehicle could be in a very dangerous
situation. For example, if the test pilot loses control,
the rocket engine would continue to accelerate the
vehicle, making a bad situation much, much worse.
The problem is that solid rocket engines cannot be shut
down before they burn out. Once they are lit, they keep
on burning. So this factor immediately eliminated this
type of rocket engine from the selection process.
The obvious choice would then be to use a liquid
rocket engine, which was the same type used by the
main engines of the Space Shuttle.
It is a little funny that they are called liquid rocket
engines because many of the different liquids that act as
the fuel and the oxidizer do not exist as liquids under the
normal conditions that we humans walk around in, as
far as temperature and pressure go.
They are heavily pressurized and chilled. So, for
example, hydrogen and oxygen, which we typically
think of as gases, were the propellant used by the
Space Shuttle’s main engines. Yet, they are liquid rocket
engines. This is because liquid hydrogen and liquid
4.6a.jpg
52%
E
Rocket Engine
The Space Shuttle launches into space using two different types of rocket engines. It has three shuttle main
engines (SME), which use liquid oxygen oxidizer and liquid hydrogen fuel, fed from the large external tank during
boost. It also has two solid rocket boosters (SRB) that are jettisoned once they burn out. The SRBs are refurbished,
but the external tank is not reused after being jettisoned. These powerful rocket engines got the Space Shuttle to
an altitude of around 200 miles in 8.5 minutes. Dan Linehan
113
2/3/11 2:31:15 PM
V
oxygen have been cooled and kept under pressure,
so they have changed their state of matter from gas to
liquid, very similar to the way steam condenses to form
liquid water.
The temperatures of liquid hydrogen and liquid
oxygen without any pressurization are -253 degrees C
(-423 degrees F) and -183 degrees C (-297 degrees F),
respectively. To handle such extremely cold propellant
takes very special pumps and very special plumbing and
very special rocket engines.
This all adds up to a huge amount of cost and a
very complicated system because not only are systems
in place for normal operation, there must be systems in
place as backups. Safety systems also must be in place.
Although liquid rocket engines are very expensive and
very complicated, liquid engines are very efficient in
terms of the amount propellant by weight compared to
the amount of thrust produced by burning them.
114
R
E
A larger rocket engine nozzle (25:1 expansion ratio)
was used by SpaceShipOne for high altitude test
flights compared to ground tests (10:1). But both
were ablative nozzles designed to slowly erode to help
keep them from completely melting or burning up
due to the intense plume of fiery gas coming out from
the rocket engine. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
IE
W
C
O
P
4.6e.jpg
60%
Y
4.6d.jpg
70%
Hybrid Rocket Engine
Burt Rutan continued his search for a suitable rocket
engine. At one point, a manufacturer wanted to
demonstrate the function of a cryogenic valve used
for its rocket engine. Liquid nitrogen, at -196 degrees
C (-321 degrees F), chilled the valve to operating
temperature.
“The valve stuck,” Rutan said. “It didn’t work. It
failed right there while I was looking at it.”
This did not instill confidence. He asked,
“Gentlemen, let me ask you, how many of those valves
are in this motor?”
Twelve, they replied.
“Did you expect this to work today?” he asked.
The answer was silence.
Before Lindbergh soloed the Atlantic in a singleengine aircraft, many of his critics charged that he
should use a multiengine airplane. Lindbergh felt that
Liquid nitrous oxide stored at cryogenic temperatures
was loaded into the oxidizer tank. By allowing it to
warm up to room temperature, the oxidizer tank selfpressurized. The oxidizer tank had an inner fiberglass
liner and was wrapped in high-strength, lightweight
carbon fiber filament. It was sized to perfectly fit
the inner diameter of the fuselage and acted as an
important structural member of SpaceShipOne.
Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne,
a Paul G. Allen Project
115
2/3/11 2:31:17 PM
4.6h.png
77%
After a spaceflight, the case/throat/nozzle (CTN) would be replaced with a freshly
fueled one. Although it was filled with solid rubber, it did have ports that ran the
length of the tube so that when the rocket engine was ignited, the combustion
gases could escape out the back through the nozzle. The flange on the right, shown
partly covered by a protective cap, was used to bolt the CTN onto the oxidizer tank.
The wire shown circling the CTN was a burn-through indicator. Mojave Aerospace
E
V
IE
4.6g.jpg
85%
R
Scaled Composites held a competition between SpaceDev and eAc to design parts of
the rocket engine. Valving at the front of the oxidizer tank was designed by eAc, and
the fuel and fueling of the case/throat/nozzle assemblies were provided by SpaceDev.
The hybrid rocket engine used in SpaceShipOne had an oxidizer of nitrous oxide
(N2O) and fuel of synthetic rubber (HTPB). It produced 16,800 pounds of thrust.
116
C
O
P
Y
4.6f.jpg
85%
W
having two or three engines made it two or three times
more likely to have an engine failure during the flight.
So the valve Rutan just witnessed malfunction
was part of a rocket engine that contained twelve of
these valves. That gave him worries. If he could find a
rocket engine with only one valve that worked at room
temperature, then that’s the one he wanted.
Rutan sought to find a rocket engine that wasn’t
so complex and expensive. But also it couldn’t be
heavy because backups and redundancies add weight
very fast. And every time the weight increases, more
propellant is needed and then a bigger vehicle has to be
built, then more propellant and so on. Weight gain could
quickly go out of control, almost like an endless loop.
A third type of rocket engine that had never been
used in manned spaceflight before began to get Rutan’s
attention—a hybrid rocket engine. This type of rocket
engine is basically part liquid rocket engine and part
solid rocket engine. The more a hybrid rocket engine
was explored, the more things made sense and fell into
place. For SpaceShipOne, the performance requirements
were on the low side. So the need to use complex
and expensive chemicals that produced a great deal
of efficiency was not necessary. SpaceShipOne could
get away with having a less efficient or a less effective
rocket engine.
“Would I use a hybrid motor to go to orbit? Probably
not unless we could develop one that was close to the
efficiency of the liquids,” Rutan said.
So how do you really keep it simple as dictated by
the engineering KISS (keep it simple stupid) principle?
For starters, Scaled Composites chose hydroxylterminated polybutadiene (HTPB) for the fuel and
liquid nitrous oxide (N2O) for the oxidizer. These
two chemicals are better known as tire rubber and
laughing gas. This choice sacrificed performance for
simplicity, which was okay.
For a hybrid rocket engine, the fuel still needs to
come in contact with the oxidizer; otherwise, there will
be no combustion. The oxidizer needs to be pumped
across the solid fuel. So, again, you are talking about
pumps and valving and everything else it takes to move
the oxidizer from the tank to the fuel.
Potentially there are a lot of systems, and each
system would add not just to weight but a possible
source of a problem. For example, a leak in plumbing
could be catastrophic. So you have to double contain
tubing and you need redundancies. If there was a leak,
then how would you compensate for it? Or detect it? You
need sensors around the plumbing.
To solve the problems of (1) the complexity of extra
systems, (2) the weight of extra systems, (3) the cost of
all the extra systems, and (4) the inherent risk to safety
with extra systems, you simply reduce the number of
the systems. And that was just what Rutan did.
Hardly a better illustration of elegant design is
there than this rocket engine. Rutan came up with
a very ingenious idea for its construction using a
cantilever design. What the design called for was
to attach a tube of rubber fuel directly to a tank
containing the liquid oxidizer.
Any chemical—including water that freezes at 0
degrees C (32 degrees F) and boils at 100 degrees C
(212 degrees F)—can be dangerous to handle under
certain conditions. Steam boilers used to heat buildings
have exploded before. But dealing steam (gaseous
water) is a lot easier than dealing with highly toxic or
highly reactive chemicals.
When liquid nitrous oxide is unpressurized, it has a
temperature of -88.5 degrees C (-127 degrees F), which
is much warmer than liquid oxygen and hydrogen but
The SpaceShipOne pilot ignited the rocket engine about
10 seconds after dropping off White Knight. Less than
10 seconds later, SpaceShipOne was already moving
faster than the speed of sound. The rocket engine was
shut off after about a minute and a half—about halfway
up apogee—and SpaceShipOne coasted the rest of
the way up. Ron Dantowitz, Clay Center Observatory,
Dexter and Southfield Schools
117
2/3/11 2:31:18 PM
E
Rear Landing Gear Hydraulic
Brakes (Extend only, gravity
and spring driven, hydraulic
brakes) Green components
Nose Skid (Aids runway braking,
extends only, gravity and spring driven,
crush damper) Green components
R
Because SpaceShipOne flew in different flight regimes, it required different flight control systems.
SpaceShipOne used a mechanical flight control system for subsonic flight, an electric motor-driven
flight control system for supersonic flight, a reaction control system for spaceflight, and the feather
for reentry. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
118
Y
O
P
C
W
V
Electric Servo Full-Flying Horizontal Stabilizers
and Lower Rudders (For trim and supersonic
flight control) Yellow control linkages
SpaceShipOne was hand-flown. It did not rely
on a fly-by-wire system, which is basically a
computer, sensor, and actuator network that
assists pilots flying aircraft, such as fighters
and airliners, nowadays.
A fly-by-wire system could have potentially
rolled the four flight control systems
SpaceShipOne used into one simple to
operate flight control system. However, there
would have been enormous costs associated
with purchasing and developing the
equipment, not to mention the huge weight
gain for all the computers, instrumentation,
and automatic mechanisms.
All that extra weight kept SpaceShipOne
that much closer to the ground. The other
big drawback with a fly-by-wire system is if
it goes out, the pilot has little to no chance
of controlling the vehicle without it. So there
needs to be a full backup of the systems as
well. Again, this translates into big cost.
Chuck Yeager was the first to break the sound barrier back in 1947. He flew the Bell
X-1 with manual flight controls—unaided by computers—and electric motors to move
control surfaces. SpaceShipOne also flew this way and became the first aircraft not
built for a government-related program to fly faster than the speed of sound. NASA
Yaw
l
Redundant Pitch and Yaw RCS
Thrusters at Top, Bottom, and
Sides of Fuselage
Cyan components
Hand Flying
ra
Upper Rudders Actuated by Pilot’s
Pedals (for subsonic yaw control)
Red control linkages
Hybrid Rocket Propulsion
System (Nitrous oxide
Feather Actuation
and rubber propellant
and Lock (Pneumatic
and abiative nozzle)
operated) Magenta
control linkages
Redundant Cold-Gas Roll RCS
Thrusters at Each Wingtip
Cyan components
4.7c.jpg
94%
te
4.7b.tif
100%
SpaceShipOne flew in three flight regimes: (1) subsonic
in the atmosphere, (2) supersonic in the atmosphere,
and (3) spaceflight free of the atmosphere. To safely
accomplish this, SpaceShipOne had to employ four
unique flight control systems.
Once SpaceShipOne was released from the carrier
aircraft at about forty-seven thousand feet, it glided
before firing off its rocket engine. So, like an airplane, it
must be able to be controlled in flight. SpaceShipOne
did so by using a mechanical system similar to what
is found in a small aircraft, such as a Cessna 172—a
single-engine, propeller-driven, four-person aircraft. The
pilot had rudder pedals and a control stick that allowed
him to change the pitch, yaw, and roll of SpaceShipOne
just as any normal airplane does.
When SpaceShipOne’s rocket engine was ignited, it
quickly built up speed but initially flew below the speed
of sound, subsonically. As it continued to increase speed
under rocket power, the pilot still used the mechanical
flight control system. These flight controls had no
augmentation. They were simply mechanical rods and
linkages with no powered assistance to help the pilot.
The rapid acceleration moved SpaceShipOne faster
and faster. Soon the force from air resistance pushing
against the spacecraft was just too much for the pilot to
physically maneuver against.
Imagine when you put your hand outside the
window when you are traveling six miles per hour in
a car. You feel a light breeze. When you put it out at
La
Elevons Actuated by Pilot’s Control Stick
(Primarily for subsonic pitch and roll control)
Blue control lingages
Flight Controls
IE
far colder than a room temperature of 22 degrees C (72
degrees F). But when heated in a sealed vessel, such as
the oxidizer tank, it self-pressurizes. Because the oxidizer
tank is now pressurized, it can squirt the nitrous oxide
from the tank to the fuel without the need of a pump.
Nitrous oxide is relatively inert at low temperatures,
and for it to react with the rubber fuel, an igniter inside
the rocket engine had to heat it above 300 degrees C
(570 degrees F).
The one valve that controlled the flow of the oxidizer
into the fuel—on and off—was located inside of the
oxidizer tank itself. This approach allowed two significant
things. It eliminated the potential leak paths because
the valve was now located in the actual tank itself and
it also helped control the temperature of the valve since
it was bathed in nitrous oxide. Rutan reduced a whole
bunch of plumbing and all the associated complexity,
weight, cost, and risk.
There are other additional savings in this rocket
engine design. Since the fuel tube was mounted
directly to the oxidizer tank, there were no other
additional supporting structures needed. Again, this
extra stuff didn’t have to go into the spaceship. The
oxidizer tank was pressurized and had to be very
strong. Rutan designed the oxidizer tank to fit perfectly
inside the fuselage. So by bonding the oxidizer tank
to the fuselage, it acted just like a structural member
supporting the fuselage. Again, a whole bunch of extra
material and potential failure points were eliminated.
This was all cost reduction due to simple solutions.
4.7a.jpg
12.5%
L on
gi
nal
tudi
4.7d.jpg
100%
Roll
Pitch
Vertical
Just like normal aircraft, SpaceShipOne
used flight controls to maneuver along
the three primary flight axes—lateral,
longitudinal, and vertical. SpaceShipOne
did so by changing pitch and roll with
elevons on the tail’s horizontal stabilizers
and yaw with rudders on the tail’s
vertical stabilizers. James Linehan
Once SpaceShipOne’s rocket engine
was lit, the pilot had to “turn the
corner” right away. This maneuver
allowed the energy the rocket engine
to move SpaceShipOne upward as
opposed to horizontally. The more time
SpaceShipOne pointed vertically with its
rocket engine roaring, the higher it would
go. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
119
2/3/11 2:31:21 PM
Y
4.7f.jpg
90%
120
R
E
V
IE
W
C
O
P
4.7e.jpg
70%
Above: White Knight, as shown, had a similar cockpit
and instruments to SpaceShipOne. The vehicles were
designed to keep as many components common
as possible. This not only eased the manufacturing
process and kept costs down, but since White Knight
flew a year before SpaceShipOne, Scaled Composites
could get good flight history on these common
components. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
Opposite: The flight director display (FDD), the
rectangular video screen in the nose section, showed
the readouts of the Tier One navigation unit (TONU).
The SpaceShipOne pilot used the TONU to monitor
important flight data and to help keep the spacecraft
flying on a very precise trajectory. In the case of an
emergency, the pilot could detach the nose section, as
shown, and then parachute out. The two rods hanging
at the bottom of the nose section are rudder linkages.
Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a
Paul G. Allen Project
sixty miles per hour, it is a lot harder to keep your
hand steady in the airflow. When you’re traveling at six
hundred miles per hour, as you put your hand outside,
it would be sheered right off. That is the type of force a
pilot must use his muscles to steer SpaceShipOne using
a mechanical system, which is impossible.
So as SpaceShipOne got faster and approached the
speed of sound, and the air pressure was pushing and
pushing and pushing, the pilot then turned to an electric
trim system. This was basically three electric motors
that adjusted the trim rudders and horizontal stabilizers
instead of the pilot trying to fight back and forth.
These electric motors were powerful enough to
move the control surfaces, such as the stabilizers and
rudders, in the face of the very high-pressure air that
SpaceShipOne moved through. But after the spacecraft
made its turn upwards and continued to head to space,
the atmosphere rapidly disappeared. If the atmosphere
disappeared, then the amount of air, or the number of
air molecules, that the spacecraft encountered was less.
Less air meant less air pressure and thus less force.
So as the spacecraft streaked upward, although it
moved faster than ever before, there was actually less
force acting on it. In order for the control surfaces to
work, they needed to have air going over them because
each of these control surfaces worked like little wings.
Without air, these control surfaces could not generate
121
2/3/11 2:31:23 PM
122
R
E
V
SpaceShipOne used a computerized system
called the Tier One Navigational Unit, or
TONU. It was the main instrument the
test pilot used to get all the readouts and
trajectories and speeds and other flight data
needed to fly the mission. This information
was presented on one simple computer
screen, which automatically stepped through
screens for the various stages of the flight.
Only the details that the test pilot needed
for that particular stage of the flight were
displayed, such as firing the rocket engine
during boost, floating in space using the
reaction control system, or gliding to the
runway for landing.
However, the TONU didn’t help fly the
aircraft for the test pilot. If the TONU died,
then the test pilot had backup instruments
for the basic flight data. The backups
resembled what would typically be seen in
more conventional aircraft—gauges, meters,
and dials.
4.9a.jpg
100%
Y
Common Components and Construction
O
P
As the design of SpaceShipOne started to finalize, Burt
Rutan could now go back and look at the vehicle that
would eventually carry SpaceShipOne on the first part
on its journey to space—White Knight. At first glance,
White Knight and SpaceShipOne don’t look anything
alike. However, looks can often be deceiving, especially
when you cannot see underneath the hood.
The nose and the cabin of the vehicles are nearly
identical as well as the front part of the fuselage.
Because of this common shape, two completely different
vehicles didn’t have to be developed, so this made the
fabrication process quicker and cheaper in places. Both
vehicles were made using a carbon fiber, epoxy, and
honeycomb composite sandwich structure.
Since these common assemblies carried the crew for
each vehicle, having two of a kind gave an extra degree
of practice and confidence when it came to building the
assembly for SpaceShipOne, which would eventually
undergo the extremes of space travel.
SpaceShipOne was rocket powered and White
Knight was jet powered, so they had a different set of
instruments and controls for each. But many of the other
components that went into building each vehicle were
the same, such as the doors, windows, fittings, mounts,
cockpit consoles, environment systems, and all kinds of
other guts.
C
W
TONU
off, the pilot could change where SpaceShipOne pointed
while in space.
Typically, space vehicles do not use compressed
air because compressed air coming out of a port is
an inefficient rocket engine. Because of their mission
requirements, the Space Shuttle, International Space
Station, and satellites in orbit use very efficient
propellants that produce a lot of thrust compared to their
propellant’s weight.
The Space Shuttle must rendezvous and dock with
the International Space Station. The International Space
Station must sometimes maneuver to avoid deadly
space debris. Satellites have to maintain proper orbit
and orientation or they will become nonfunctional.
This is where the KISS principle makes yet another
big difference. If you already have a very large supply of
propellant, in this case compressed air, and maneuvering
in space isn’t critical to the mission, then trying to develop
a complex reaction control system where you have to buy
expensive chemicals is simply overkill.
The fourth flight control system was the feather,
which has been discussed in detail previously. On
reentry, the feather was required to get SpaceShipOne
through safely. It controlled the flight path of
SpaceShipOne as it transitioned from space back into
the atmosphere.
If SpaceShipOne was spinning or tumbling or doing
some other gyration in space and the pilot wanted to
counteract it, then he would normally use the reaction
control system. However, it wouldn’t be crucial for him to
correct these motions because unlike the Space Shuttle
where the orientation and trajectory were critical on
reentry, SpaceShipOne could be rolling or even reenter
upside down. The feather would self-right SpaceShipOne,
putting it into the proper orientation automatically.
So if the reaction control system failed altogether,
SpaceShipOne could get around it. The reaction
control system did not have to be very complicated,
but without the feather, SpaceShipOne faced damage
during reentry.
IE
the force needed to change or maintain course. As
SpaceShipOne got closer and closer to space, it now was
unable to use the mechanical system or the electric trim
system to control its position, orientation, or direction.
What was needed then was a reaction control
system (RCS), a third flight control system. Reaction
control systems are used in all spacecraft that need
to maneuver in space. They essentially are a series of
small rocket engines.
SpaceShipOne had nozzles that released pressurized
air. Just imagine the simple rocket engine created by
blowing up a balloon and letting it go. The balloon
suddenly flies off until the air inside runs out. It is the
air going from the inside to the outside that provided
a small amount of thrust, causing the balloon to go
zipping along. SpaceShipOne’s reaction control system
behaved just like that. But since there is no sound in
the vacuum of space, you wouldn’t hear the air blowing
outside the spaceship.
Squirting puffs of air certainly does not create very
much thrust compared to more powerful chemical rocket
engines. But Scale Composites could avoid a whole
separate kind of propellant and its associated systems
and redundancies by using the same gas that lifted
and lowered the feather and activated other various
components. So this greatly simplified the design.
SpaceShipOne had a series of nozzles that pointed
in different directions. By switching the ports on and
In the early stage of construction, White Knight’s
fuselage was assembled by bonding together large
composite sections. These sections were shells made
of carbon fiber/epoxy composites. When completed, the
fuselage would have a strong, lightweight honeycomb
structure. The forward section of SpaceShipOne’s
fuselage is also shown below White Knight. Mojave
Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G.
Allen Project
Windshield
One thing that jumped out at first glance of SpaceShipOne was its
windshield made up of sixteen round windows. There was actually a
very important reason for this design, besides the somewhat cool and
futuristic aesthetic. Having a large, single-piece windscreen would not
just be heavy, but it would also reduce the overall structural strength.
This type of windscreen would need to have strong supports to hold it
in place. Also, each window had to be totally redundant—an inner and a
separate outer window pane, each strong enough to handle the pressure
if one failed.
A large windscreen that is redundant would be very heavy and a
nonround shape would also be much heavier. With an array of circular
windows, more of the fuselage, by area, was then the stronger and
lighter composite material, compared to weaker and heavier window
material. These circular windows were spaced to give the pilots a specific
attitude reference—the top nose windows aligned with the horizon during
the glide home, the bottom nose windows aligned with the horizon at
touchdown on the runway, and four other windows aligned with the
horizon during the supersonic portion of the rocket boost. Aside from
reducing the weight and improving the strength of SpaceShipOne, the
design opened up a maximum of viewable area.
4.8a.jpg
28%
Although SpaceShipOne had a 60-mile glide range after
reentering, it was not a high performing glider. The
pilot would have to carefully fly the landing approach.
SpaceShipOne didn’t have control surfaces to slow it
down for landing. It could drop its landing gear, but that
was a one-time maneuver. Once down, the landing gear
stayed down until retracted by the ground crew. Mojave
Allen Project
123
2/3/11 2:31:24 PM
By getting the mothership flying first, it acted as a
testbed that enabled Scaled Composites to check out the
functionality of the common components. Shaking out
these on the vehicle under conditions less critical and
more forgiving was much less risky than trying to shake
them out in the vehicle that was going to break the sound
barrier, go to space, and reenter the atmosphere.
Like any mechanical system, there is a period
of breaking in and seasoning. This not only gives
confidence that all this new stuff is doing the job it is
supposed to do but shows reliability over the long run.
And sometimes a part used in White Knight at one
place would be used in SpaceShipOne in a different
place, as with the air-actuated cylinders used for
the landing gear on White Knight. The same type of
cylinders was used to raise and lower the feather.
The feather design was such an absolutely crucial
part of SpaceShipOne’s design. Again, if the feather
failed to operate while on the way back from space,
SpaceShipOne faced damage on reentry. Using White
Knight to test out parts gave SpaceShipOne a great head
start and significantly reduced the level of risk.
Nose Skid
O
P
C
E
SpaceShipOne’s nose skid was light, thin, and curved
to fit the outer contour of the fuselage. This made it very
lightweight, and because the landing skid only went one way,
there was no internal retraction mechanism. It was spring
loaded. So before a flight, the nose skid was reset by the guys
in the hangar. The nose skid was also designed in such a way
that it acted as a brake and a shock absorber without any
additional moveable parts.
“The skid provides reliable braking, so you will decelerate
on the runway even if your wheel brakes fail,” Rutan said.
“So if you only land and never take off, it is fine to have your
brakes on all the time.”
After SpaceShipOne came to stop on the runway, a pickup
truck towed it away. This taxi system was cheap, reliable,
and external to SpaceShipOne.
Parts and systems that added weight and could have a
failure were eliminated. So for a potentially complicated
system—such as front landing gear, a critical system because
SpaceShipOne would crash if it failed on landing—Rutan
distilled it to probably the simplest form possible. This
improved performance, reliability, and cost effectiveness.
The nose skid is one of the single best examples of an elegant
design in terms of bang for the buck.
4.8b.JPG
95%
V
4.9b.jpg
66%
R
124
Another highly effective and simple solution was the use of
the nose skid. Landing skids have been used in space vehicles
before. The X-15, for example, used a landing skid at the rear
of the vehicle, not the nose as with SpaceShipOne.
There is a significant difference between an aircraft with
retractable landing gear and an aircraft with fixed landing
gear. Fixed landing gear is a very simple system. The landing
gear is always out, and you never have to worry about it
getting stuck in the up position or being stuck in the down
position. The weight of the whole fixed landing gear system
is much less than the weight of a retractable landing gear
system.
The advantage of having retractable landing gear is that
your performance is much greater. You don’t have these
huge objects dangling from the aircraft creating lots of
drag. A landing skid is just about in the middle of these two
types. And for SpaceShipOne, it was really the best of both
worlds in a way. It took both the advantages of fixed and the
retractable landing gear systems.
By simply deciding not to have a wheel and replacing it
with a landing skid, you save an enormous amount of space as
well. And once you have reduced the footprint, you can now
easily make it retractable.
IE
W
Right: The head-on view of White Knight and
SpaceShipOne appears to show more differences than
similarities. In fact, White Knight was designed to be
as similar as possible to SpaceShipOne. White Knight
shared many of the same components and systems,
so it could qualify them prior to SpaceShipOne even
flying. White Knight could also duplicate some of
SpaceShipOne’s flight characteristics, which also
allowed the pilots to use it as a trainer.
Tyson V. Rininger
Right: A honeycomb sandwich structure was used
to build the cabin walls of SpaceShipOne and White
Knight. Outer and inner carbon fiber composite shells
were separated by Nomex honeycomb structures. And
each porthole had an outer and inner window. The
SpaceShipOne crew did not need to wear spacesuits
since the cabin was pressurized and the duration of the
flight was so short. However, oxygen masks were worn
as a precaution. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
Y
4.9c.tif
60%
Shown here after returning from space, SpaceShipOne got a tow off the runway from Paul Allen, Burt Rutan, and Richard Branson (front
to back). Because SpaceShipOne had a nose skid, it could not taxi by itself. The nose skid epitomized elegant design. It acted as a
brake, supported the vehicle, was lightweight, didn’t take up a lot of room, was easy to build, and didn’t cost a lot. Dan Linehan
125
2/3/11 2:31:26 PM
Y
318
high-altitude, utility
N318SL
in operation with Scaled Composites
Mojave Aerospace Ventures
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
1 August 2002
Doug Shane (pilot) and
Pete Siebold (flight engineer)
one pilot (front seat) and two passengers
(back seat), space-qualified, pressurized cabin
82 ft
468 ft2
60” (maximum outer diameter)
8,000–9,000 lbs
19,000 lbs (at takeoff with SpaceShipOne)
two J85-GE-5 turbojets with afterburners,
7,700 lbs total thrust
two fixed front and two retractable rear
6,400 lbs
JP-1
0.6 Mach (160 KEAS)
500 miles
53,000 ft
O
P
4.10b.jpg
63%
R
126
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight pilot
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Fuselage diameter
Payload capacity
Gross weight
Engine
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Fuel type
Never exceed speed (VNE)
Range
Ceiling
C
W
These two strangely wild-looking aircraft were both designed to be spaceship
launchers. Proteus, flying below White Knight, was to be used for Burt Rutan’s original
spaceship concept, which was a single-place rocket. However, because of the size of
three-place SpaceShipOne, it was necessary for him to build a bigger launch vehicle.
E
Right: Equipped with two J85-GE-5 turbojet engines,
White Knight lifted SpaceShipOne to a launch altitude
of about 47,000 feet (14,330 meters). To reach that
height, White Knight would have to engage the engines’
afterburners. Though not the best engines for the
application because flameouts and dropping out of
afterburners were not uncommon, they were cheap and
still got the job done. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
White Knight Details
Test pilots had much more practice and experience
extricating themselves in case of an emergency.
The powerful jet engines, control surfaces, and
lightweight, aerodynamic shape of White Knight
also enabled the test pilots to simulate certain flight
characteristics of SpaceShipOne, similar to how the
shuttle training aircraft—Gulfstream jets modified to
handle like the Space Shuttle in glide—allowed NASA
astronauts to practice gliding and landing.
The lightweight composite structure of White Knight
allowed for a huge thrust-to-weight ratio. This let the
pilot simulate the SpaceShipOne boost profile. However,
the jet engines and their afterburners functioned poorly
when reaching altitudes around fifty thousand feet.
Inboard and outboard speed brakes, when
deployed, allowed the pilot to also simulate the glide of
SpaceShipOne.
By the eighth flight test, White Knight had
qualified the entire envelope required for launching
SpaceShipOne. After flying additional test flights, four
pilot certifications, and two air shows, White Knight flew
SpaceShipOne into the sky for the first time. This was
only White Knight’s twenty-fourth flight.
After SpaceShipOne flew its last flight, Scaled
Composites made White Knight available for other
missions, such as “reconnaissance, surveillance,
atmospheric research, data relay, telecommunications,
imaging, and booster launch for microsatellites.”
4.10c.jpg
75%
IE
Proteus set a pretty high standard for a wild look as
far as aircraft go. So when White Knight rolled out,
there was no surprise to see such a surprising looking
aircraft, which resembled a spindly looking bat or a sci-fi
spaceship. Rutan had already designed SpaceShipOne,
but it wasn’t built yet. Now he was ready to design the
first ever aircraft that had the sole purpose of launching
a spaceship.
With twin booms and twin tails, the configuration
was never flown before on a manned jet aircraft. The
goal for building White Knight was to build it as quickly
and inexpensively as possible. It was built around the
requirements for launching SpaceShipOne and around a
powerful set of jet engines.
White Knight proved to be one of Scaled
Composites’ best handling aircraft from the start of flight
testing. But like any aircraft in development, there were
tweaks. Spoilers on the top of the wings were disabled
and bolted down. Angled-up wingtips were installed to
improve flying qualities.
“We used J85 engines off a Northrop T-38 because
they were cheap, and we essentially got them off eBay,”
said Doug Shane, who piloted the first flight. “They
were probably the worst-suited engines for the airplane
that we could have selected, except for the fact, as I
mentioned, they were cheap.”
White Knight was used as a trainer for
SpaceShipOne as well. The mothership also used a
TONU, and since the cockpits were nearly identical, the
test pilots could get a great degree of familiarity with
SpaceShipOne even before sitting inside it. For safety,
the door and emergency hatch were in the same place.
4.10a.jpg
70%
V
White Knight
White Knight was one of the most important components of Scaled Composites’ space program. Shown here returning after launching
SpaceShipOne for its first spaceflight, White Knight enabled Scaled Composites to build SpaceShipOne safer, lighter, and cheaper by lifting
SpaceShipOne above most of Earth’s atmosphere before a rocket engine was ever lit. Tyson V. Rininger
127
2/3/11 2:31:28 PM
Flights and
Spaceflights
C
O
P
4.11a.JPG
62%
IE
W
Test pilots Pete Siebold, Mike Melvill, and Brian Binnie (front row, left to right)
each flew SpaceShipOne missions. They also flew White Knight when it carried
SpaceShipOne. SpaceShipOne designer Burt Rutan (left) and test flight director Doug
Shane (right) stand behind the test pilots. In 2008, Rutan semiretired from Scaled
Composites. Shane took over as president, and Siebold became the new flight test
director. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
SpaceShipOne Flights
Mission
captive carry
captive carry
captive carry
captive carry
glide
glide
glide
glide
glide
glide
rocket powered
glide
rocket powered
rocket powered
spaceflight
spaceflight
spaceflight
V
Flight Number
01C
02C
03C
04GC
05G
06G
07G
08G
09G
10G
11P
12G
13P
14P
15P
16P – X1
17P – X2
E
Date
5/20/03
7/29/03
8/7/03
8/27/03
8/27/03
9/23/03
10/17/03
11/14/03
11/19/03
12/4/03
12/17/03
3/11/04
4/8/04
5/13/04
6/21/04
9/29/04
10/4/04
R
Flight tests of SpaceShipOne began 20 May 2003.
Scaled Composites started with a captive carry mission,
where White Knight simply lifted SpaceShipOne into
the sky and flew it around. Scaled Composites needed
to figure out the basics. For example, is this going
to couple together without any adverse interaction?
Imagine when you strap something to the roof of your
car—like a canoe or mattress—and you drive highway
speeds. If you don’t have it tied down right, then the
thing could easily rip off your car and create a whole lot
of problems.
In a way, those at Scaled Composites were just
making sure that SpaceShipOne and White Knight could
fly together without creating problems for each other.
SpaceShipOne went up this way unmanned. The next
incremental step was to put a pilot inside to begin the
process of checking out systems while in flight. The pilot
moved the controls and saw how the forces built up. It
was essentially like a mini wind tunnel but in situ.
After gaining confidence and everything checked out
so far, the next step was to drop SpaceShipOne for a
glide test with a pilot inside. The pilot would be able to
fly freely and see how everything worked and then just
glide home. Mike Melvill described this as one of the
scariest flights he had done in the program because of
the unknowns. SpaceShipOne had never been in the air
by itself.
Typically, when Melvill had done the first flight of a
vehicle, it would start off slowly with taxi tests on the
runway, just to have air flowing over the airplane. He
would get an initial feeling of its flying qualities. After
that, he would lift a few feet off the runway to see that
nothing squirrely happened and there were no hints of
dangerous handling issues.
In other words, he was starting out pretty close to
the ground, whereas SpaceShipOne’s first flight was
at forty-seven thousand feet, nearly nine miles above
ground. So it better well work. Otherwise, Melvill would
have to use the escape hatch by unscrewing the nose of
the cockpit and pushing it off and then jumping out.
Each subsequent glide flight pushed the flight
envelope open more and more in terms of speed,
g-force, mass, maneuvering, and altitude. Even the
feather was raised and retracted in glide test flights.
After the flight envelope expanded about as far as it
could go by unpowered flights, on 17 December 2003,
Brian Binnie flew the first rocket-powered flight test of
SpaceShipOne. On this day, one hundred years earlier,
Wilber and Orville Wright made the first powered and
controlled flight of a heavier than air vehicle at Kitty
Hawk, North Carolina.
128
Y
4.11b.tif
66%
Pilot
unmanned
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Pete Siebold
Mike Melvill
Brian Binnie
Brian Binnie
Pete Siebold
Pete Siebold
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Mike Melvill
Brian Binnie
Flight tests began as captive carries with SpaceShipOne slung underneath White Knight the entire time. It was, in fact, like a giant wind tunnel in
the sky. These first test flights, unmanned and manned, made sure that the vehicles coupled together without problems. When manned, the test
pilot could exercise some of the systems, gaining familiarity and getting the feel of them. Tyson V. Rininger
“When you light that rocket motor off, everything
literally starts with a bang. There is so much energy
associated with that rocket motor. It is like a tsunami
sweeps through the cabin and literally takes you away,”
said Binnie.
“You really have nothing in your background or DNA
to tell you that what is happening to you is good. You
have no basis. Three or four seconds will go by, and
you go, ‘Ah, I’m not dead. Therefore, it must be going as
they told me it was going to go.’ ”
The first rocket-powered flight test of SpaceShipOne
was an extraordinary achievement for Scaled
Composites. This was the company’s first flight test of a
manned vehicle to break the sound barrier.
After two more rocket-powered flight tests, each
opening the flight envelope more and more, higher
and faster, SpaceShipOne was ready to take a crack
at space. And on 21 June 2004, Mike Melvill piloted
SpaceShipOne to an altitude of 328,491 feet, only a few
hundred feet above the requirement of the Ansari
X Prize.
On this, only the fifteenth flight of SpaceShipOne,
it reached space and became the first privately funded,
built, and flown spacecraft ever to do so. Melvill earned
the very first set of commercial astronaut wings. But for
all the importance of that spaceflight, the spacecraft was
not configured to qualify as an Ansari X Prize winning
attempt. In fact, SpaceShipOne was significantly lighter
than what the Ansari X Prize required, where it had to
be manned or ballasted for the weight of three people.
SpaceShipOne had just barely crossed into
space. Going by the ratio that for every pound lighter
SpaceShipOne was, it would go up an extra 150 feet
higher, if Melvill had been a few pounds heavier, then it
was quite possible that SpaceShipOne would not have
reached the boundary of space.
Melvill wanted a dramatic way to demonstrate
the effect of weightlessness. In the morning before
this spaceflight, on the way to Scaled Composites, he
stopped off and picked up some M&Ms to release in the
cockpit of SpaceShipOne when he reached space. His
choice of M&Ms was thoughtful. They were colorful, so
they would show up nicely on the cockpit video. They
were also hard-shelled, so he wouldn’t have to worry
about them melting all over the place after he released
them. And then they were soft enough that if they got
trapped somewhere where they shouldn’t be, then they
wouldn’t jam things up and could easily be smashed.
Thus, he proved that M&Ms melt inside your space
helmet and not in your space capsule. But the most
129
2/3/11 2:31:29 PM
4.11f.tif
100%
Y
4.11e.tif
100%
O
P
4.11c.jpg
91%
C
4.11h.tif
100%
4.11k.tif
100%
4.11g.tif
100%
4.11i.tif
100%
4.11j.tif
100%
4.11l.tif
100%
4.11m.tif
100%
W
There were eight glide test flights after the captive carry test flights. SpaceShipOne pilots would drop off White Knight at altitude. Although
unpowered, these test flights opened up a significant amount of the flight envelope in terms of factors such as speed, altitude, g-force, stall
characteristics, and feather performance. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
130
R
E
V
After SpaceShipOne completed its glide
test flights, the next step was to ignite the
rocket engine. Three rocket-powered flights
incrementally increased the burn time of
the rocket engine from 15 seconds up to 55
seconds. With a longer burn time for each
subsequent test flight, SpaceShipOne’s max
speed and max altitude also increased. Each
of these test flights was still an envelope
expansion. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
important factor may have been that they shared his
same initials.
To solve the problem that SpaceShipOne barely
reached space even when much lighter than it
would have been for an Ansari X Prize attempt,
Scaled Composites first enhanced the rocket engine
performance to give it more energy to help carry it
higher. Next, Scaled Composites reduced the weight by
removing as many extraneous things from the spaceship
as possible, very much the way Charles Lindbergh
scrimped and shaved anything possible to reduce the
weight of the Spirit of St. Louis.
Lastly, when Melvill had flown the mission,
he had encountered wind shear going up. He had
difficulty maintaining a very good trajectory. Instead of
pointing upward as the trajectory called for, he pointed
more horizontally. So the energy was being applied
downrange as opposed to being applied upwards toward
space. That was a key factor in him nearly not making it
to the altitude. Even with external influences, pilots had
to fly a precise check trajectory. Only three months later,
Scaled Composites had SpaceShipOne ready for its first
Ansari X Prize attempt.
IE
4.11d.tif
100%
This sequence taken at three-second intervals shows the feather up as SpaceShipOne rotates in space. The feather was deployed while SpaceShipOne
coasted to apogee even though the feather was needed for reentry. Since the feather was SpaceShipOne’s way to safely return to Earth, the pilot
wanted to get the feather up as soon as possible in order to troubleshoot any potential problem before SpaceShipOne started falling back to Earth.
SpaceShipOne actually hit its fastest speeds on reentry. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC. SpaceShipOne, a Paul G. Allen Project
The First Ansari X Prize Attempt
Up to now nothing went perfectly smoothly for
SpaceShipOne. Flight test programs very rarely do.
If they did, then there would be no need for them.
There were failures and malfunctions and unexpected
problems that led to design modifications. But that was
the entire purpose of flight testing, to test how all the
systems integrated with one another. You cannot expect
the testing to go perfectly. That’s just not realistic.
SpaceShipOne even had a crash landing during its first
rocket-powered flight test. On SpaceShipOne’s very last
test flight, it just made it to the level of space.
And now it was time to go for the prize. Scaled
Composites had just one vehicle to make two
spaceflights in only two weeks.
Scaled Composites normally does not publicize
its test flights—for good reason. But Melvill’s flight
attempt to space had been a little bit of an exception.
Though it was an absolute milestone in the history of
aviation, it still hadn’t completely caught on to the rest
of the world yet that all this was happening. That flight
had showed a nongovernment program could indeed
get to space.
When it was time for SpaceShipOne to take a shot
at the Ansari X Prize, the world was certainly watching.
Millions of people tuned in from across the globe and
tens of thousands showed up in Mojave to watch the
first attempt, which was called X1. So there was an
extraordinary amount of focus. And there were no
guarantees. The vehicle had to be significantly heavier
because of the rules of the Ansari X Prize. Anything
could go wrong. It was flying to space after all. It was
an experimental vehicle, a completely new design. And
a new type of rocket engine was used for the first time
as well as a new type of reentry system. SpaceShipOne
had to overcome all of these challenges.
131
2/3/11 2:31:29 PM
O
P
C
W
The reentry system was also a fallback. If
SpaceShipOne was still rolling upon reentry, the feather
system would eliminate the rolling because of how
effective it was at slowing the spacecraft down and
orienting it belly first. So even if he had run out of
propellant for the reaction control system, he was still safe.
Scaled Composites had a very big problem, though.
To most of the world it looked like, Wow, these guys
are out of hand. How is this going to be the start of
commercial space travel if this is what’s going on?
Corkscrewing up into space is not the way to go. It’s not
on the flight plan.
Rutan and the engineers had to figure out, and
very quickly, what the problem was. And they did.
They isolated the problem down to the fact that Melvill
had flown SpaceShipOne in a regime that it was never
flown before. The air was very thin when SpaceShipOne
started rolling. Melvill needed to correct the rolling
tendency that was happening because of asymmetric
thrust coming out of the rocket engine. The control
surfaces didn’t have enough air flowing over them and
had lost effectiveness to compensate for the roll as
SpaceShipOne pointed nearly straight up.
The solution turned out to be a very simple one.
“For 17P we merely limited the amount of allowable
‘down pitch trim’, so Brian would definitely avoid the
negative-lift condition that caused the departure,” Burt
Rutan said. “The solution was to more gently turn the
corner, such that a forward correction later would not be
needed. Pointing straight up at burnout is okay, as long
as you do not push to negative lift. This quirk is fixed on
SpaceShipTwo.”
IE
Mike Melvill would pilot X1, and he was determined
to make up for the poor trajectory during the first
spaceflight. Now, as SpaceShipOne ascended in boost,
in order to make sure the trajectory was steep enough,
Melvill pulled more aggressively up and then found
that he needed to push and trim nose-down to correct
the trajectory. Thus, for the first time, SpaceShipOne
was supersonic at negative lift, where the directional
stability was worse than predicted. This caused a rolling
departure. As the spaceship zipped up faster and faster
and farther and farther out of the thick atmosphere,
SpaceShipOne had lost control. It spiraled up, making
twenty-nine rotations. He couldn’t prevent it.
However, SpaceShipOne was not in a dangerous
condition. Because of the rarefied atmosphere, there
were not a lot of forces on the vehicle. Melvill didn’t
have to worry about SpaceShipOne disintegrating
since he was high enough for it not to be a problem.
So as SpaceShipOne spun, it fortunately spun in a
manageable way. Melvill just held on, did not look out
the windows, and let SpaceShipOne spiral up to space.
Once up there, he used the reaction control system to
counteract the rolling.
If Melvill aborted when the rolling started, he would
have not made the Ansari X Prize altitude. This was
why you have amazing pilots doing the job. They are
able to judge a situation that looks pretty dire to most
people on the ground, assess the problems, and can
come up with solutions. To go or not to go? That’s the
test pilot’s question, and the answer must come in a
split second’s time.
Y
4.11p.jpg
38%
Opposite: This montage is actually a collection of
images taken from a mobile telescope. Each image is
a separate photograph that stitched all together shows
the complete flight path of SpaceShipOne—ascending
in captive carry, dropping off White Knight, boosting to
space, coasting to apogee, reentering the atmosphere
with the feather, and gliding back to Mojave Air &
Space Port. Ron Dantowitz, Clay Center Observatory,
Dexter and Southfield Schools
V
4.11n.tif
70%
132
R
E
The entire spaceflight lasted about 24 minutes, and
that’s the time from when SpaceShipOne first dropped
off of White Knight to the time SpaceShipOne landed
on the runway. For about 3.5 minutes of that time, the
pilot got to enjoy weightlessness. To demonstrate this
effect, Mike Melvill released handfuls of M&Ms into
the cockpit of SpaceShipOne while in space. Mojave
Allen Project
133
2/3/11 2:31:31 PM
Y
4.11r.jpg
77%
E
R
134
O
P
IE
W
When Brian Binnie flipped the switch to fire the rocket
engine, SpaceShipOne rocketed past so close to White
Knight, which flew on blaring afterburners, that Mike
Melvill and Matt Stinemetze could hear it from inside.
Scaled Composites now understood the rolling
behavior of SpaceShipOne and figured out how to stay
out of those conditions. But the truth was that during
the previous flight, those at Scaled Composites thought
they knew everything before and thought SpaceShipOne
would fly perfectly fine during Melvill’s spaceflight as
well. But something new did come up then. Was there
something else now waiting for Binnie, somewhere in a
part of the envelope that hadn’t yet been explored?
This was by no means a gimme flight by any stretch
of the imagination. Since SpaceShipOne cut its engines
halfway to apogee, the only way to know how high it
would go was to follow an altitude-predicting instrument.
It read 328,000 feet. Then it read 350,000 feet. Binnie
gave the rocket engine a few more seconds of juice after
that just for good measure. Now the world waited as
SpaceShipOne coasted to space as the gap between true
altitude and predicted altitude narrowed down.
“Hey, we’re going to the stars. This is so cool,”
Rutan said of his feeling as he watched SpaceShipOne
cruise past a true altitude of 328,000 feet, still with
plenty of momentum.
SpaceShipOne hit apogee at 367,500 feet, which
was not only well above the Ansari X Prize requirement
but also above the previous record of 354,200 feet held
by the X-15. Binnie had captured the trajectory and flew
the first and only flawless flight of SpaceShipOne, a $10
million performance.
V
Brian Binnie would be slated to fly the next spaceflight.
Although Scaled Composites had a two-week window to
make both flights, in only five days SpaceShipOne was
ready to go back up again.
This test flight, 17P, was by far the most important
flight of them all in terms of the ramifications for
commercial space travel. It was only the seventeenth
flight of SpaceShipOne. This was the $10 million flight.
Make this and claim the Ansari X Prize. That was an
awful lot of pressure. The prize expired in only a few
months. Scaled Composities wouldn’t have much time
to redo it if there was a major mishap. It had to be
done right.
The rules did not stop a team from flying a third time
in that two-week window if the second attempt wasn’t
successful. The attempts did not have to be consecutive.
But no one wanted to be in that situation. A third try
would be a huge step back. Considering the corkscrew
into space during the first attempt, if the second attempt
failed, then that would certainly cast severe doubt on
the viability of the program and on all commercial space
travel. It was critical for SpaceShipOne to make it on the
second try. SpaceShipOne had yet to fly a perfect and
problem-free flight. Now, $10 million was on the line.
“I can safely say the one [thing] that made the
pilots uniformly uncomfortable was the hour-long wait
in SpaceShipOne while the White Knight carrier aircraft
dragged it up to release altitude,” said Binnie in an
article he wrote for Air & Space. “During this time, there
is little to do and the mind is somewhat free to wander.”
Waiting an hour between takeoff and release from
White Knight was more than torturous for Binnie. He
couldn’t wait to light the fire and stop being a passenger
on the mothership. He wanted to take control. His last
flight in SpaceShipOne had been ten months ago. It
ended in a crash landing.
“For me personally, a problem or failure or inability to
not pull this off for whatever reason, the other side of that
coin was a bottomless pit. It felt to me like an abyss.”
4.11q.jpg
91%
C
X2
With just five days between spaceflights X1 and X2 of
SpaceShipOne, Burt Rutan, Paul Allen, Mike Melvill,
Brian Binnie, and the rest of the team from Scaled
Composites captured the Ansari X Prize. Visionaries
Peter Diamandis and Anousheh Ansari celebrated the
victory of the first step of new space and were joined
by Richard Branson, who stood ready to start the
second step. X PRIZE Foundation
Brian Binnie photographed this view of Earth from
inside the cockpit of SpaceShipOne on 4 October
2004. For the second Ansari X Prize attempt, he had
just flown a perfect trajectory exiting the atmosphere
and entering space. He reached an apogee of 367,500
feet, which was not only well above the 328,000-foot
threshold of space but exceeded the previous world
record of 354,200 feet, held by the X-15, by more than
two and half miles. Mojave Aerospace Ventures, LLC.
135
2/3/11 2:31:32 PM
Y
Chapter 5
V
IE
W
C
O
P
5.0.jpg
83%
Paul Allen and Richard Branson sat with Burt Rutan on the couch in his Mojave pyramid
house in 2004. “What do you think can happen during your lifetime?” Rutan asked of them
about space. He wondered what they thought they’d eventually be able to experience and
enjoy. He felt that this question planted a stick in the ground and set a goal.
They spoke about dreams and desires that reached back
to their childhoods. The high-tech philanthropist, the
adventurous entrepreneur, and the aviation innovator
sought answers. They pondered the future.
“I would love to play racquetball and golf in zero g,”
Burt Rutan said. “If you were at your resort hotel in Earth
orbit, you could board a very simple spacecraft, which is
nothing but an inflated cabin with some propulsion and
fuel, that leaves Earth orbit and takes that beautiful swing
around the Moon and then decelerates back into orbit.
It doesn’t have to have a wing or landing gear or thermal
protection. It’s a very simple spacecraft. But it gives
people the view that Apollo 8 had.”
Rutan had planted his stick. Humans had first set
foot on the Moon in 1969—thirty-five years previous
to this lofty conversation. Now several years later, he
remains convinced that air-launched spaceships and
commercial suborbital space travel will eventually lead
to “unbelievably cheap orbital space travel” and space
hotels. If this is the case, then lunar excursions, like his
wish, would not be that far off.
Reapplying a familiar classification system, Rutan
designated suborbital projects as Tier One, as with
SpaceShipOne; orbital projects as Tier Two; and
projects that reached other bodies in space, like
the Moon, as Tier Three. However, before reaching
Tier Two and Tier Three, a big step was needed. By
building on the technology Rutan and Allen developed,
Branson would begin that step, which happens to be
called Tier One-B.
136
R
E
A starship follows a spaceship. Or is it the other way around? Starship was the
first aircraft Scaled Composites worked on in 1982. SpaceShipTwo, carried by
WhiteKnightTwo, began its flight testing in 2010. Nearly three decades have
passed between the two. Just as Starship stretched the boundaries way back
then, SpaceShipTwo is prepared to do same. Virgin Galactic/Mark Greenberg
SpaceShipTwo and
WhiteKnightTwo:
The Next Generation
137
2/3/11 2:31:33 PM
5.1a.jpg
88%
Y
SpaceShipTwo
O
P
Illustrated by Cory Bird, what looks like a scene from a 1950s Disney
cartoon or a sci-fi classic like 2001: A Space Odyssey, space stations
and space hotels not too different than these have already begun to
be developed. And as spacelines and spacecraft continue to grow in
capabilities, it won’t be too far off that people will be able to take a trip
into orbit to check into their space hotel rooms. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
W
5.1b.jpg
75%
IE
What excites you most about new space?
New space excites me because finally the private sector has
been given the opportunity to do what it does best—innovate.
The fact that space is ceasing to be a monopoly for big oldfashioned government rockets is a good thing. We now have
the technology to put so much more into space than we do
at the moment, if we can only lower the cost and increase
the frequency and ease of access. There are now lots of
entrepreneurs coming forward to do just that, and it’s very
exciting—people like Elon Musk, who is also a Virgin Galactic
space customer and is doing wonderful work at SpaceX.
What are you most looking forward to on your first ride to space?
Most people tend to say that the thing they are most looking
forward to about their ride into space with Virgin Galactic is
the amazing experience of weightlessness. For me I think it is
the thrill of the ride up, pulling all those g’s. I have already
experienced in the centrifuge. Followed by the silence of space,
the prelude to that amazing view of the planet Earth, which I
can’t wait to see. Looking down on that curved Earth and that
thin, thin layer of atmosphere, protecting billions of people
from the vacuum of space, will be an awesome sight.
138
R
E
What made you think that Scaled Composites could build a
spaceship for you?
Quite simply the fact that SpaceShipOne looked like something
that could be developed into a commercial space vehicle. The
fact that Burt is a genius and that Scaled is the undisputed
master of composite materials also helps. I think our team had
also learned a lot about Scaled from the Virgin Atlantic Global
Flyer project, and they had a lot of confidence that Scaled could
rise to the challenge of the much bigger Virgin Galactic project.
When it came down to make a decision on an
investor, what clinched it for Rutan was the passion for
space he saw in Branson’s eyes and that this passion
was genuine. Rutan knew there would be tough
challenges ahead, but he also knew that Branson’s
commitment would be unwavering.
In 2001, Scaled Composites partnered with Paul
Allen’s Vulcan, forming Mojave Aerospace Ventures
to conduct Tier One, the SpaceShipOne research test
program. In 2006, Scaled Composites contracted with
Branson’s Virgin Group to conduct the first research
program, Tier One-B, to develop a prototype and do
the initial flight tests of the first commercial spaceship,
SpaceShipTwo (SS2). Virgin also funded the startup of The
Spaceship Company (TSC) to license and manufacture
the SpaceShipTwos and WhiteKnightTwos (WK2) that
will enter commercial service, flying the public to space.
Founded by Branson in 1999, the spaceline Virgin
Galactic will operate those spaceflights. An airline flies the
public in airliners. A spaceline flies them in spaceships.
Airline companies, on the other hand, leave the
development of airliners to manufacturers like Boeing
V
How did you first find out about SpaceShipOne?
Will Whitehorn phoned me from the factory where he and
another colleague, Alex Tai, were looking at the construction
of the Global Flyer. It was a very excited phone call in which I
found out that Burt was building a contender to win the
X Prize. I already knew about the X Prize because Dr. Peter
Diamandis had tried in the late 1990s to get Virgin to sponsor
it. We had met him in London and the conclusion was that
rather than sponsor the prize we would consider investing in
whoever won it.
Why did you want to create a spaceline?
Tourism has always been at the forefront of the
industrialization of transport, and that is true from shipping
and the railways right through to early aviation. I have always
wanted to go to space myself, and I had a gut feeling that many
thousands of others would do the same or would feel the same
way if access to space could be safe enough and cheap enough.
I also believe that space tourism is the key to turning space
from an extremely expensive monopoly of science and the
military into an area much more widely used for commercial
and industrial activity. Creating a successful spaceline is
something that I believe could kick start the whole industry.
C
Sir Richard Branson on Space and Spaceships
How did you get to know Burt Rutan before SpaceShipOne
came along?
I first met Burt Rutan in the early 1990s when he was building
a carbon composite capsule for a global balloon project called
Earthwinds. It was then I first learned about the amazing work
he was doing in aerospace with new-technology materials. We
then met again in 1999 when my colleague Will Whitehorn and
I were looking at a private space project in Mojave, the Rotary
Rocket, which we decided not to invest in. A couple of years
later, my friend Steve Fossett and I jointly funded Burt to build
a very special aircraft called the Virgin Atlantic Global Flyer.
It was at that point that Virgin’s engineers, marketers, and
ideas people got their first real exposure to Burt and Scaled
Composites.
“I remember sitting on the sofa with my parents back
in 1969, watching the incredible TV footage of the
first Moon landing, and I knew that one day I wanted
to go to space,” Richard Branson said of this lifechanging memory. Branson got his start in the rock
’n’ roll business but in 1984 founded the UK-based
Virgin Atlantic Airways. This airline has never had a
fatal accident, and its growth helped allow its parent
company to form other airlines in the United States
and Australia.
Starting a spaceline was something that Branson
had been thinking about long before Virgin Galactic was
officially announced. Branson even visited Rotary Rocket
to see Roton during a test flight.
Before Mike Melvill and Brian Binnie flew
SpaceShipOne to space to capture the Ansari X
Prize, Scaled Composites was approached by four
different investors wanting to fund the next-generation
spaceship. Branson was initially interested in being just
a spacecraft operator, not a spacecraft builder. However,
Branson wanted to do what he could to ensure the new
space industry developed.
This time Richard Branson, Burt Rutan, and Paul Allen (left to right) are looking up to see SpaceShipOne descend from space after reaching the
altitude required to win the Ansari X Prize. With SpaceShipTwo, they’ll have the chance to see from the other side. X PRIZE Foundation
139
2/3/11 2:31:34 PM
An Everyday Person’s Spaceship
140
E
or as unrestricted as in SpaceShipTwo, but when I talk
about my trip to Antarctica, most people never even
wonder what boat I took to get there.
SpaceShipOne No. 2 could have been generating a
lot of cash immediately. It would have siphoned some
of the attention from the skilled labor force working
on SpaceShipTwo, but things didn’t get started on
SpaceShipTwo right away anyway. SpaceShipOne
No. 2 could have been a good stepping stone for
SpaceShipTwo by allowing those things that come
up when starting something completely new to be
addressed by a transitional vehicle—we know we have
this problem or that problem but it will be hammered
out by the time the flagship is ready.
SpaceShipOne No. 2 could also have had a lot of
merit when considering the lull that has occurred since
the fabulous and exciting times of the Ansari X Prize.
Any spaceflight from then until now could have helped
fill that void.
It seems that there was a window of opportunity
that Scaled Composites could have capitalized on. After
all, the Mercury astronauts, when strapped into their
spaceship, had difficulty feeling the weightlessness.
That wasn’t a bad ride either. Regardless, making
spaceships is a tough business. If it was well
understood from the beginning how long it would have
taken, maybe something like SpaceShipOne No. 2
would have been explored.
Y
O
P
V
348
commercial space vehicle launcher
N348MS
Virgin Galactic
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
21 December 2008
Peter Siebold (pilot) and Clint Nichols (copilot)
2 crew, 14 passengers
140 ft
1,315 ft2
25 ft
78 ft
approx. 66,000 lbs
35,000 lbs
4 Pratt & Whitney Canada PW308A turbofans
quad retractable, front and back of each boom
22,000 lbs
Mach 0.65
60,000+ ft
R
Model number
Type
Customer
Fabrication
Flight testing
First flight date
First flight crew
Seating
Wingspan
Wing area
Tail height
Length
Gross weight
Payload
Engines
Landing gear
Fuel capacity
Cruise speed
Ceiling
A Second SpaceShipOne
IE
WhiteKnightTwo Details
But Scaled Composites had three or four motors, so
it could have flown more spaceflights even without
funding Task 21. Rutan’s first reaction was to argue why
Scaled Composites should keep flying. He said, “You’ve
got to prove a business plan. If this is going to go on
to the next step, you got to do this.” However, Rutan
quickly realized that Allen was right in wanting to ensure
SpaceShipOne was saved for history.
This book goes to print seven years after SpaceShipOne
made its first spaceflight on 21 June 2004. It is
interesting to think what would’ve happened if Scaled
Composites used the tooling it had, built another
spaceship just like SpaceShipOne, and started flying it
to space commercially.
Consider asking people, “Would you like to take a
ride to space?” I’d imagine people would fall into four
basic groups based on their answers: (1) those who
would never go up no matter what, (2) those who would
take an awful lot of convincing but would end up going,
(3) those who could stand to wait for a better ride, and
(4) those who don’t care that much about the ride as
long as it gets them where they want to go.
I would be at the front of the line to volunteer
as a spaceflight crash test dummy. So I figure that
puts me squarely in the fourth group. The ride in
SpaceShipOne No. 2 wouldn’t be as high or as long
C
After SpaceShipOne won the Ansari X Prize, what
happened to it? Scaled Composites still did have a few
extra rocket engines on hand and made provisions for
Task 21.
“Task 21 was that we would fly SpaceShipOne every
Tuesday for five months, reasoning that if we did that
you could then make with confidence a commercial
business plan,” Burt Rutan said.
But Task 21 wasn’t funded. Rutan had figured
that once he got the data together on the costs of the
spaceflights that had flown, he would then approach
Paul Allen.
“That would be the opportunity for Paul and me and
both of our friends to be astronauts,” Rutan explained.
“If you just count only the passengers, you’ve got fortyfour people. So maybe twenty of my friends could be
astronauts and twenty of his friends could be astronauts.
That would be kind of cool. That was the plan.”
But something got in the way of the plan. Rutan
underestimated SpaceShipOne’s impact on the public,
media, and historians. After SpaceShipOne’s first
spaceflight in June 2004, the Smithsonian’s National
Air and Space Museum thought that SpaceShipOne was
an important artifact representing the future commercial
spaceflight industry. The museum wanted to hang
SpaceShipOne in its Milestones of Flight Gallery.
When that request came, Paul Allen didn’t want
to fly SpaceShipOne anymore after the Ansari X Prize.
W
and Airbus, though these manufacturers will, of
course, do their very best to make their customers
happy. Airline companies are still free to fly airliners
from any manufacturer. It will be interesting to see
how Virgin Galactic will embrace spacecraft from other
manufacturers as the market for commercial space travel
grows. But commercial space travel is virgin territory,
and the sky is no longer the limit.
Virgin Galactic will start with an initial fleet of
five SpaceShipTwos and three WhiteKnightTwos. The
Spaceship Company established new facilities at the
Mojave Air & Space Port for the construction of the new
SpaceShipTwos and WhiteKnightTwos that will round
out Virgin Galactic’s fleet. Only the prototypes were built
directly by Scaled Composites, so it now has handed off
the manufacturing to The Spaceship Company.
In 2009, Virgin Galactic significantly boosted its
financial commitment to commercial space travel as
it announced an exciting new partnership with Aabar
Investments out of Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Aabar Investments put in $280 million, making the
company a 32 percent shareholder of Virgin Galactic.
It is very encouraging to see partnerships forming
beyond national boundaries. After all, borderlines are not
viewable from space, and the view into space can been
seen from anywhere on our planet. The Ansari X Prize
hoped to achieve an international march into space. And
very fortunately for the success of commercial space
travel, this cooperation appears to be happening.
Homebuilt Spaceships
Imagine if you could build your own homebuilt spaceship. Burt Rutan got
his start with homebuilts, right? Think of the kit: the fuselage from the guy
who made the fuselages for Solitaire, the welded parts from the guy who
made the welded parts for the Long-EZ, the other pieces from Spacecraft
Spruce. I would sign any liability waiver in the world to get my hands on
one of those. So, I wonder, who will be the first to design a homebuilt
spacecraft? Burt?
How much would it cost? Design, development, construction, and
testing of SpaceShipOne and White Knight, including the operation of
three spaceflights and a few spare rocket engines, cost Scaled Composites
$25 million. Imagine plunking down a few million dollars for a kit. You
wouldn’t have to build a mothership. With kits available, there wouldn’t
be any shortage of motherships for hire, just as glider pilots don’t have
to own a tow plane. Whereas the 1970s and 1980s were the era of canard
homebuilts, what if the 2010s and 2020s become the era of the garagebuilt spaceships? What if not a fleet of VariEzes were parked out in front
of Scaled Composites or at Oshkosh, but a fleet of SpaceShipOnes? Maybe
it’s too soon. It took a good seventy years after the Wright Flyer for the
VariViggen kit to come out.
141
2/3/11 2:31:34 PM
Build it Big
C
O
P
“The first thing we realized is that we couldn’t rebuild
SpaceShipOne,” said Will Whitehorn, president of Virgin
Galactic. “Customers are not going to pay two hundred
thousand dollars to go to space and be cramped in
a tiny cabin and not be able to move around and
experience weightlessness and not be able to see the
blackness of space and the brilliant planet below them.”
So Burt Rutan sketched out a design with a fuselage
centered on the wing, as White Knight’s does, and two
tail booms with vertical fins connected together at the
top by a horizontal tail, similar to the tail of the ATTT
(Model 133-B). It turned out that this tail configuration
was complex and very difficult to analyze. Bob Morgan,
WhiteKnightTwo project engineer and chief designer,
recommended changing the tail configuration to
something that more closely resembled that of White
Knight and GlobalFlyer.
However, both these two vehicle had a single,
centerline fuselage with the engines inboard as
opposed to the twin booms and outboard engines of
WhiteKnightTwo.
W
“I have not been the designer, except for some basic
concept stuff—only the guy who checks and advises
changes—for the aircraft after SpaceShipOne and White
Knight, which were designed in the 1999 to 2002 time
period. Yes, the new folks are very good designers. I am
very proud to have found them and to have them on our
team here at Scaled,” Burt Rutan said.
Rutan had just turned sixty-one when
SpaceShipOne made it to space the first time. He had
been burning the rocket engine from both sides for
decades. In 2008, due to health issues, he stepped
down as president of Scaled Composites. However, he
is still involved with SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo
development, but not as the responsible designer.
His role as mentor has become more important as he
puts the company into the hands of the other fabulous
engineers who fill the ranks in Scaled Composites.
After making some preliminary concept sketches,
Rutan handed off the design responsibility to Jim Tighe,
Matt Stinemetze, and Bob Morgan. They did major
configuration changes and oversaw the team that did all
the detail design of SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo.
E
V
Bryan to turn co-ed friendly we’d need to
replicate & lighten background &
then key in text to overprint. OK to
mess with someone else’s graphic
like this, or leave as is?
-BP
same question for 5.3b & 5.3c
IE
5.3a.jpg
84%
R
One doesn’t have to look too hard to see the influence of White Knight and GlobalFlyer on WhiteKnightTwo. White Knight was built for hauling
while GlobalFlyer was built for efficiency. To ensure commercial success, WhiteKnightTwo had to combine the best aspects of its two direct
descendants. Virgin Galactic
142
During the SpaceShipOne spaceflights, Morgan got
the idea that it would be wonderful to be able to watch
the launch up close. But SpaceShipOne was slung
underneath White Knight, and by the time it came into
view after separation, SpaceShipOne was boosting to
space nearly supersonic.
Morgan thought with twin booms, SpaceShipTwo
would be in the middle, and with the cabins at exactly
the same height, the passengers in WhiteKnightTwo
could get a very good view of the launch. A host of
other benefits resulted from having twin booms, such as
improved aerodynamics, easier loading and unloading of
passengers and flight crew, and a huge open space to
carry lots of other exciting things besides SpaceShipTwo.
“Bob really came up with the justification that ‘let’s
have the engines outboard the booms instead of inboard
like White Knight,’ ” Rutan said. “And again the main
reason was who knows what we were going to be
carrying under that. You might want a spaceship with a
V-tail, and it would be right in the engine plume.”
Similar as with White Knight and SpaceShipOne, the
new mothership has a cockpit and cabin nearly identical
to the new spaceship.
“WhiteKnightTwo has the cabin structure, the
windows, and the environmental control system of a
spaceship,” Rutan said. “We are qualifying that cabin
to go to space. And everything that’s intended to be in
the spaceship to allow you to safely put people in space
even without pressure suits is in this airplane.”
At 7.5 feet (2.3 meters) in diameter, 12 feet (3.7
meter) in length, and able to carry six passengers,
the cabin has a maximized volume so that when the
passengers reach space in SpaceShipTwo, there is as
much room as possible to float around in. Because of
this, it was a bit of a challenge for engineers to fit all the
systems into WhiteKnightTwo.
“It looks a lot different,” said Rutan of the enormous
WhiteKnightTwo. “It is not just a grown up version of
White Knight.”
It is not only the mothership that grew in size,
though. Since winning the $10 million Ansari X Prize in
2004, Scaled Composites has doubled the number of
its employees and its footprint as it gobbles up buildings
along the flightline of the Mojave Air & Space Port.
5.3b.jpg
87%
Y
WhiteKnightTwo
With a 49.5-foot (13-meter) clearance between the twin booms, there is an awful lot
of room hanging under the giant wing of WhiteKnightTwo. This open architecture will
not only allow WhiteKnightTwo to carry SpaceShipTwo but will provide the flexibility
to carry many other payloads, some capable of reaching orbit. Virgin Galactic
5.3c.jpg
100%
WhiteKnightTwo is really twice the aircraft of its predecessor and namesake—and
sometimes a little more than that. The aircraft has two pilots, not just one. It has two
cabins; the original has one. It has four engines compared to two. It has nearly twice
the wingspan of White Knight. And WhiteKnightTwo is more than twice the launch
weight, actually three times as much. Virgin Galactic
143
2/3/11 2:31:35 PM
counterparts, the air density at this altitude is still the
most favorable to launch at.
After SpaceShipTwo reaches apogee, the only
assistance it will have while plummeting back to Earth is
that of gravity. Meanwhile, once free of SpaceShipTwo,
WhiteKnightTwo will train the next group of astronauts,
who will have just witnessed the SpaceShipTwo launch
up close. WhiteKnightTwo then will fly a series of zero-g
maneuvers. But unlike NASA’s Vomit Comet, which
porpoises in 0 to 2 g parabolas that each give zero-g
periods of about twenty-five seconds, WhiteKnightTwo
passengers float in zero-g for five to ten seconds and
then WhiteKnightTwo takes another twenty-two seconds
slowly building up to 1 g. This is to simulate the actual
buildup rate of g-force felt when SpaceShipTwo enters
the atmosphere after a spaceflight.
“Now while you do that, as you bring them down,
you don’t have to stop at 1 g or even 2 g, like the airliner
does,” Rutan said. “You roll and descend and pull and
take them all the way to 6 g. So what you done is that
you’ve taken passengers from floating all the way around
to the maximum g-load they’ll see on reentry.”
So the passengers aboard WhiteKnightTwo get to
practice over and over the same kind of g-force scenario
they’ll face during a spaceflight reentry.
The selection of the tail number is of special
significance to Scaled Composites, and WhiteKnightTwo
was given N348MS. All North American aircraft start
with N, but the 348 stands for WhiteKnightTwo’s model
number and MS stands for mothership.
Internally at Scaled Composites, WhiteKnightTwo
goes by a little bit of a different name. With
SpaceShipTwo attached to WhiteKnightTwo, Bob
Morgan noticed it resembled a triceratops, a threehorned dinosaur. Since White Knight is still in use
and so as not to cause confusion between the two
while talking about them, the name T-Top stuck for
WhiteKnightTwo.
5.3e.jpg
31%
W
C
O
P
Y
5.3d.jpg
53%
Unveiling of Eve
allowed to stay. However, after the war she couldn’t fly
an airliner because women weren’t allowed. So she did
the next best thing to keep herself in the air, which was
to become one of the very first intercontinental flight
attendants and fly aboard the de Havilland Comet, the
very first jetliner.
A photograph of Eve as a young woman was used
to create the sexy Galactic Girl insignia that will also
grace the side of every Virgin Galactic mothership
and spaceship.
WhiteKnightTwo will cruise along at Mach 0.65.
And although Scaled Composites is shooting to
have WhiteKnightTwo fly at high altitudes above
sixty thousand feet, WhiteKnightTwo will launch
SpaceShipTwo at around forty-eight thousand feet. This
is above about 85 percent of the atmosphere and similar
to the separation altitude of SpaceShipOne. Even though
both SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo are much
bigger and more powerful than their first-generation
144
R
E
V
On 28 July 2008, WhiteKnightTwo was officially
unveiled. “This is a big moment for us,” Branson said,
having just climbed out of the cockpit with Rutan as
the launch aircraft glistened in the sunlight like a star.
“And I think you will agree that WhiteKnightTwo, or Eve
as we will be able to officially call her soon, is one of
the most beautiful and extraordinary aviation vehicles
ever developed.”
The smooth lines, the lovely curves, the silky
transitions, and the two big booms—which of course
are the fuselages that can both hold passengers—make
WhiteKnightTwo a fine looking piece of aviation for sure.
Now christened the Virgin Mother Ship (VMS) Eve,
the first WhiteKnightTwo is named in honor of Branson’s
mother, who was quite the aviation pioneer herself.
Eve Branson tried to pose as a boy to get into Royal
Air Force glider training during World War II. That was
certainly a hard one to pull off, but nonetheless she was
IE
WhiteKnightTwo’s wing and fuselages, or booms, are shown before being mated up. Two single-piece composite wing spars run nearly end-toend inside the wing to provide support for the 140-foot-long wing and heavy payloads. These spars are the largest dimension composite parts,
made of carbon fiber and epoxy, ever used in an aircraft. Virgin Galactic
A closeup of the giant tail is shown here during construction. A mechanical flight
control system using pushrods and carbon fiber cables move the rudders and
other flight control surfaces. No hydraulics or other power augmentation is used.
WhiteKnightTwo does not have yaw dampeners or even an autopilot. Virgin Galactic/
Thierry Boccon-Gibod
5.3f.jpg
44%
New Territory with Virgin
In all their years of operation, neither RAF or Scaled
Composites built aircraft like a typical aircraft
manufacturer. The aircraft they built were not mass
produced and then sold to customers. The most
complicated aircraft Scaled Composites ever built and
made for commercial use, T-Top is a whole other
beast entirely.
“All the primary structure is composites, except for the
usual things like landing gear and the engine mounts,”
said Doug Shane. “Everything else is graphite/epoxy.”
The two wing spars inside the 140-foot (42.7-meter)
wing, which are the main structural elements of the
wing, are the largest continuous pieces of composites
ever used in an aircraft. They provide a wingspan larger
than those of the Airbus A320 and Boeing 757. “The
Modern airliners have tended to go from four smaller engines to two larger engines
in order to reduce cost and improve efficiency. But because of WhiteKnightTwo’s
configuration and the amount of weight it would be carrying, if it had only two
engines and one engine ever went out on takeoff or landing, then it would be a very
dangerous situation since its engines have to be so far from the centerline of the
aircraft. As a safety measure four engines are used, two on each side. Shown here is
one of WhiteKnightTwo’s Pratt & Whitney Canada PW308A turbofan engines. This
engine was the most fuel-efficient aircraft engine of its type available at the time of
WhiteKnightTwo’s construction. Dan Linehan
145
2/3/11 2:31:39 PM
Rocket Engine Accident
5.3h.jpg
38%
WhiteKnightTwo designer Bob Morgan (center) and WhiteKnightTwo
pilot Pete Siebold (right) prepare Richard Branson for his first flight
in WhiteKnightTwo during the EAA AirVenture on 28 July 2009.
The cabin of WhiteKnightTwo will be nearly identical to that of
SpaceShipTwo. And the main difference for instruments in the cockpit
is the center console where WhiteKnightTwo has four throttles and
turbofan engine controls and SpaceShipTwo has rocket engine switches
and levers for its feather. Virgin Galactic/Mark Greenberg
146
R
E
WhiteKnightTwo made its first flight on 21 December 2008, piloted by
Pete Siebold with Clint Nichols as copilot. In 2009, it made its debut
at Oshkosh, as shown here. Pilots fly from the right fuselage. The left
fuselage of the prototype does not have windows, but black decals are
used to represent how the subsequent vehicles will look with actual
windows in place. Just like White Knight before it, WhiteKnightTwo
will be able to act as a trainer for SpaceShipTwo pilots. By using
four spoilers to kill lift, two inboard and one outboard on each wing,
WhiteKnightTwo can mimic the glide performance of SpaceShipTwo.
These spoilers also eliminate the need for thrust reversers on the
engines. Dan Linehan
V
IE
5.3g.jpg
60%
O
P
Y
A fatal explosion occurred as Scaled Composites conducted
tests for SpaceShipTwo’s hybrid rocket during the very early
stage of development.
Eric Blackwell, Todd Ivens, and Glen May lost their lives on
26 July 2007. Three others were severely injured but have since
recovered. Scaled Composites is a tight group because of its
family-like culture, somewhat remote location, and the fact
that employees can’t openly discuss the sensitive projects they
work on with others. The losses and injuries to these men hit
the company terribly hard.
SpaceShipTwo required a much bigger rocket engine than
SpaceShipOne did, but they both would use the same oxidizer.
As with SpaceShipOne’s rocket engine development program,
early testing was done cold flow, which is like taking all the
steps to fire the rocket engine except that the oxidizer and fuel
are never ignited.
When the oxidizer flows from the tank during a cold flow
test, it runs straight through the rest of the rocket engine
without reacting with the fuel. A special igniter must be used
to start the rocket engine burning. Without it, there is no
combustion and fiery plume. Cold flows were considered safer
and lower risk tests because flowing the oxidizer was only
a physical transfer, not the chemical reaction that librated
enough energy to move a spacecraft to space.
Work halted for about a year not only on the rocket engine
but on SpaceShipTwo as well until internal and external
investigations got to the bottom of what caused the accident.
An official report about the accident was given by the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which
stated: “The explosion occurred during an oxidizer tank flow test
in which nitrous oxide flowed through a valve on the end of a
tank being developed for a rocket motor. The test was designed
to be ‘cold flow’ and no fuel was to be present. However, during
the test the nitrous oxide ignited and exploded.”
This was a very dark time for Scaled Composites. Safety
had always been paramount to Burt Rutan. Coming up with
aircraft with very safe flying qualities, such as the stallresistant canard designs of the VariViggen and the VariEze
and the safe engine-out twin designs of the Defiant and
Boomerang, was the foundation Rutan built RAF upon, which
then grew into Scaled Composites.
In the thirty-three years since RAF first opened its hangar
doors in Mojave, after all the aircraft developed and flight tested,
neither RAF nor Scaled Composites had had a work-related fatality.
It was an unthinkable tragedy, yet it still happened.
One of the probable causes of the explosion was determined
to be contamination. So Scaled Composites issued the following
list of modifications and procedures it would undertake as a
result of the accident:
C
with Burt and Mike and Dick as well. My first job out to
school—I was a flight instructor—and I was trained as a
flight engineer and subsequently a test pilot. We have a
tradition of looking within to bring up talent.”
On 21 December 2008, Pete Siebold flew
WhiteKnightTwo for the first flight. White Knight had
made twenty-three flights before carrying SpaceShipOne
the first time. WhiteKnightTwo flew a similar number of
flights, twenty-four, before lifting SpaceShipTwo on its
first flight.
WhiteKnightTwo was built much bigger than
required to simply carry and launch SpaceShipTwo. The
payload weight is about 30 percent more than needed
for SpaceShipTwo. This workhorse can haul a payload
of thirty-five thousand pounds up to fifty thousand feet
over a range of 2,300 miles. This gives it the capability
to possibly launch small payloads into low Earth orbit,
conduct scientific experimentation, and even function
as a transport or utility aircraft in nonspace-related
applications. Launching a single person into orbit from
WhiteKnightTwo is even a “theoretical” possibility.
Though WhiteKnightTwo can be used as a launch
platform for different applications, Virgin Galactic’s
primary focus is on flying passengers to suborbital space
in SpaceShipTwo.
W
wing spar in this airplane has no secondary bonds,”
Rutan said. “It has no fasteners. It is full-span. . . .
Composites don’t bolt together very well, so we just
don’t use bolts at all.”
To power the carrier aircraft, four Pratt & Whitney
Canada PW308A turbofans are mounted in pairs
outboard of each fuselage. “A key to this basic platform
is its inherent redundancy in this configuration,” said
Pete Siebold, who flew SpaceShipOne three times and
is now Scaled Composites’ flight test director. “We can
have an engine failure—even two engine failures—you
won’t be able to make the ultimate mission of dropping
the spaceship, but at sea level and low altitude you still
have excess performance in terms of climb capability
and takeoff performance.”
WhiteKnightTwo will also have range enough to ferry
SpaceShipTwo coast-to-coast across the United States,
which is significantly greater range than the five hundred
miles of White Knight.
“Many of the Scaled test pilots are internally
grown,” Siebold said. “From Mike Melvill coming in
as a machinist to work for Burt, being trained by Dick
Rutan and Burt himself, to become a world-class test
pilot and astronaut. And Doug Shane, the same. For his
first job out of college, he came to Scaled and trained
• Conduct increased compatibility testing between N O and any
2
materials that contact it in the tank and eliminate incompatible
materials in the flow path
• Revise cleaning procedures to further minimize the risk of
contaminants in the system
• Replace the composite liner in the N O tank with a metal tank liner
• Dilute N O vapor in the tank with nitrogen or another inert gas to
2
2
decrease its volatility and/or act as a pressurant
• Design additional safety systems for the N O tank to minimize the
2
danger due to tank overpressure, for example, a burst disk feature
• Increase the amount of testing during the development program
• Form an advisory board comprised of rocket industry experts for
oversight
• Improve test site safety procedures
• Provide the industry with any pertinent materials compatibility data
and/or testing protocols developed as it moves forward
Scaled Composites resumed development of the rocket engine
and SpaceShipTwo in 2008 and has since implemented these
corrective actions.
It goes without saying that the loss of life and injuries
sustained by these men was tragic. It is not sufficient to
say that because they happened to be pursuing something
pioneering, at the forefront of technology, that this
circumstance was not unexpected.
However, the reality is that there are thousands of
workplace-related fatalities as well as tens of thousands motor
vehicle–related fatalities every year in the United States alone.
These numbers are large but go relatively unnoticed because
the surrounding situations are more commonplace. Do we stop
working or driving cars?
It is human nature to advance, to progress, to stretch
boundaries. But we have an obligation to be safety-minded and
to be extremely careful not to let bottom-line decisions cloud
this. However, as the commercial space industry grows, it is
naive to think that it will be the only industry impervious to
accidents.
Charles Lindbergh wrote this after his courageous flight in the
Spirit of St. Louis: “I don’t believe in taking foolish chances, but
nothing can be accomplished without taking any chance at all.”
5.5.jpg
35%
On 26 July 2007, a rocket engine explosion claimed the lives of
three Scaled Composites employees and severely injured three
others. Scaled Composites had never faced a tragedy like this
before. A memorial is dedicated to the three men in Legacy Park at
Mojave Air & Space Port. Dan Linehan
147
2/3/11 2:31:41 PM
5.6c.tif
77%
O
P
SpaceShipTwo is flown by a pilot and copilot. The
“shirt-sleeve” environment inside SpaceShipTwo will not
require the passengers or crew to wear spacesuits. The
functionality of the cockpit was also a consideration, and
Virgin Galactic brought in airline pilots to help review the
human factors since the vehicle is manually flown over
a wide range of flight conditions and is intended to fly
several times a week.
Although the overall length doubled, there is a
huge increase in cabin volume by comparison. For
SpaceShipOne, the seating for the pilot and two
passengers was confined to small section with a 5-foot
diameter that quickly narrowed down to its pointed
nose. The pilot and copilot of SpaceShipTwo sit side-byside in the flight deck, forward and slightly above the
cylindrically shaped, 12-foot-long, 7.5-foot-diameter,
six-passenger cabin.
One of the most noticeable differences on
SpaceShipTwo is the position of the wing. On
SpaceShipOne’s first Ansari X Prize attempt, it started
to roll uncontrollably and spiral its way up to space.
This had to do with the high-wing configuration of
C
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson christened the
SpaceShipTwo prototype as the Virgin Space Ship (VSS)
Enterprise, tail number N339SS, during its rollout on
7 December 2009. Enterprise was chosen out of respect
for the crafts that have borne this name before and the
private enterprise that initiated commercial space travel.
In comparing SpaceShipOne to SpaceShipTwo, the
lineage is clear in terms of mission profile, air launch,
flight control, rocket engine, and feather system. But
it was very important for Virgin Galactic to expand the
experience its customers would have as opposed to
the experience of being strapped in the backseat of a
duplicate of SpaceShipOne.
As Virgin Galactic sought to figure this out, it
determined there were four things that people wanted
most in a journey to space: the view of Earth and
the black sky of space, the thrill of a rocket ride, the
experience of weightlessness, and the ability to float
around in the cabin. So the design of SpaceShipTwo
focused not just on achieving but on maximizing these
experiences for the passengers.
Y
A Stellar Enterprise
When the rocket engine cuts off, SpaceShipTwo coasts
to space and little by little gravity slows it down.
Passengers get to unstrap from their seats and float
around in the cabin, experiencing approximately 4
minutes of weightlessness and periods of microgravity
as well. Virgin Galactic
5.6b.jpg
82%
What to do with text?
E
V
IE
W
5.6a.jpg
53%
148
R
Scaled Composites designed a much more advanced simulator for SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo. A giant curved projection screen
outside its windows gives depth perception, so when flown the view looks very realistic. And when SpaceShipTwo pirouettes or rolls in a space
simulation, it feels so real that it’s hard not to grab the edges of the seat to stop from falling over. The simulator also gives a realistic feeling of
the forces on the flight controls. However, Scaled Composites has not yet figured out how to simulate weightlessness. There’s no substitute for
the real thing. Virgin Galactic
SpaceShipOne had room for one pilot up front in the nose and two passengers in a
row right behind the pilot’s seat. SpaceShipTwo flies with a pilot and copilot, who sit
side-by-side in a slightly raised flight deck. And SpaceShipTwo carries six passengers
in its 12-foot-long and 7.5-foot-diameter cabin. Virgin Galactic
SpaceShipOne. This problem was solved by moving the
wing down the fuselage to a low-wing configuration.
SpaceShipOne had sixteen 9-inch-diameter
windows, but to afford the best sights, SpaceShipTwo
has a 17-inch-diameter side window and a 13-inchdiameter overhead window for each passenger. The
crew has four 21-inch-wide triangular windows and a
fifth window smaller in size.
Passengers can’t see a blanket of stars in suborbit
on the daylight side of Earth because of all the sunlight
that reflects off Earth. This is the black sky. The stars
are outshined. But on the dark side of Earth where the
Sun is hidden, if spaceflights operate during nighttime,
then there are stars galore to see. There also is no
atmosphere between the passengers and the stars to
cause the stars to twinkle—just the passengers, the
vacuum of space, and the stars.
149
2/3/11 2:31:43 PM
5.4a.jpg
32%
Spaceport America
Just like the Mojave Desert, the southern desert of New Mexico
claims home to many pioneering advancements in aerospace.
Putting aside what actually happened in Roswell, the United States
space program took foothold when the V-2 rockets captured during
World War II were taken to White Sands Missile Range and tested.
The V-2 rocket was the starting equipment used by both the United
States and the former Soviet Union during their track meet up and
down from space that started with Sputnik.
Ironically, the V-2 was coming back to its roots. Robert Goddard,
an inventor and visionary, chose this region to conduct his rocket
testing in the 1930s. The rocket scientists who had developed the
V-2 had built upon Goddard’s discoveries involving liquid-fueled
rocket engines.
This part of New Mexico has been rocket country for about
as long as there have been big rockets. After Virgin Galactic
announced it would begin a spaceline with SpaceShipTwos and
WhiteKnightTwos, New Mexico moved fast to make an offer Virgin
Galactic couldn’t refuse.
It wasn’t just New Mexico’s rocket legacy in itself that was
the draw. It was very practical reasons. Spaceport America is
located forty-five miles northeast of Las Cruces. It is dry, has
relatively good weather year-round, and has an elevation of 4,600
feet, which is nearly a mile closer to space than at sea level. The
location is somewhat remote, so there are no major population
centers to contend with. And the airspace is uncongested,
especially because of the restricted zones of nearby White Sands
Missile Range. Las Cruces and Holloman Air Force Base even played
host to the X Prize Cup in the years following the Ansari X Prize.
Spaceport America broke ground in 2009 and completed its tenthousand-foot-long runway in 2010. In 2011, it started to become
operational. The centerpiece of the spaceport is the dynamic,
eye-shaped terminal hangar facility (THF). With room to hangar
the SpaceShipTwos and WhiteKnightTwos of Virgin Galactic, there
is also room for vehicle maintenance, astronaut training, public
viewing of the runway, and more.
Y
5.6d.jpg
81%
O
P
Once clear of the mothership, SpaceShipTwo’s pilot
ignites its rocket engine and in eight seconds, the
spacecraft breaks the sound barrier. In about forty-five
seconds, SpaceShipTwo travels faster than three times
the speed of sound (Mach 3). Passengers experience
a max g-force of 3.8 g on boost, but during reentry
they face 6 g. They will experience approximately four
minutes of weightlessness.
Virgin Galactic states it intends to fly SpaceShipTwo
to “an apogee of at least 110 kilometers.” This is
equal to 360,900 feet or 68.4 miles. By the way
of comparison, Brian Binnie flew higher than this
in SpaceShipOne (112 kilometers, 367,500 feet, or
69.6 miles). Given Burt Rutan and Richard Branson’s
penchants for pushing boundaries, it doesn’t seem
reasonable the SpaceShipTwo will not fly higher than
SpaceShipOne. The 110 kilometers is almost certainly
understated. After all, if the max speed is expected to
be higher, and the max reentry force is higher, then it
should follow that the max altitude will be higher even if
the gravitational force on SpaceShipTwo is a little higher
because of its greater mass. SpaceShipTwo has a design
range of 70–130 kilometers after all.
This diagram from Virgin Galactic gives some of the specifications for SpaceShipTwo.
But these figures were given before the flight test program started. So slight
variations might exist as the flight program and daily operation reveal SpaceShipTwo’s
actual capabilities. Virgin Galactic
E
V
IE
W
5.6e.jpg
35%
C
Riding a Rocketplane
In 2005, New Mexico announced it would invest $200 million to
construct Spaceport America. The spaceport received its launch
license from the FAA in 2007. This is where Virgin Galactic will start
commercial service to space in SpaceShipTwo. Spaceport America
Conceptual Images URS/Foster + Partners
The THF was built into the desert floor for insulation and
makes use of natural lighting, cooling, and ventilation as well as
solar power to make the facility highly energy efficient.
Spaceport America is owned by the State of New Mexico and
operates like an airport. But in this case, spacelines and other
space companies lease the use of the spaceport. Virgin Galactic
is the anchor tenant and has signed a twenty-year lease with
Spaceport America and will locate its main operations base there.
Flight testing on the prototypes of SpaceShipTwo and
WhiteKnightTwo and those built subsequently will be conducted in
Mojave. But once they are turned over to Virgin Galactic, they will
be operated commercially out of Spaceport America.
You don’t have to be a billionaire or an aerospace genius to
be part of this new wave of space travel. The citizens of New
Mexico helped front the money to build Spaceport America. The
surrounding communities even voted to increase their taxes to
ensure it would be built. As a thank you to those people of who
voted in favor of the tax hike, Virgin Galactic will hold a drawing
to give one of these voters a free to trip to space.
Spaceport America
integrates state-of-art green
building technology into a
stunning and imaginative
design that looks more
like artwork than space
work. Spaceport America
Conceptual Images URS/
Foster + Partners
5.4b.jpg
14%
Would need to photoshop out
exisitng text to re-key.
150
R
SpaceShipTwo will fly a very similar profile to SpaceShipOne. However, SpaceShipTwo will fly faster and experience
higher g-forces on reentry. Apogee is planned to be greater than 110 kilometers, and the entire spaceflight, from
takeoff to touchdown, is expected to last 2 hours. Virgin Galactic
151
2/3/11 2:31:48 PM
5.6f.jpg
58%
Flight Testing to Early Operation
5.6h.jpg
37%
C
O
P
Y
There is also a difference between the two flight test
programs. SpaceShipOne had to make two spaceflights
to win the Ansari X Prize. Anything after that was gravy.
However, SpaceShipTwo will be flown time and time
again. And once flight testing is over, it won’t be flown
by test pilots anymore. It is designed to be flown by
airline pilots. And where SpaceShipOne could—and
did—fill its two passenger seats with four hundred
pounds of ballast, that arrangement won’t quite work on
a commercial passenger-carrying spacecraft.
The flight-testing program for SpaceShipTwo
will obliviously be used to confirm its capabilities,
performance, and operation during spaceflight. But
since SpaceShipTwo will be used commercially—that
is, generating money from being flown like an
airliner—things like turnaround time, consumable
requirements, and preventative maintenance will start to
be determined.
As with the SpaceShipOne program, SpaceShipTwo
and WhiteKnightTwo have been designed with as many
common components as possible. WhiteKnightTwo
started flying more than a year earlier than SpaceShipTwo,
so this gave Scaled Composites a head start on
understanding how some the SpaceShipTwo components
preformed in an operational environment by being able to
use WhiteKnightTwo to shake things out ahead of time.
The SpaceShipTwo flight test program will follow a
similar progression to that completed by SpaceShipOne.
Captive carry, glide, rocket-powered, and then space
test flights will incrementally expand the flight envelope.
SpaceShipTwo had its first captive carry flight on
22 March 2010.
On 10 October 2010, pilot Pete Siebold and copilot
Mike Alsbury flew SpaceShipTwo on its first glide flight.
“Our spaceship demonstrated impressive flying qualities
right out of the box. Its flight test-measured stability and
gliding performance exceeded the pre-flight predictions,”
Rutan said in his official announcement. “The test
crew opened up two-thirds of SpaceShipTwo’s required
subsonic speed envelope, maneuvered it above 2 g,
checked its dynamic and sideslip handling, exercised its
flight-path control system and made a perfect landing;
spot-on the runway target.”
Following a successful second glide flight on
28 October 2010, SpaceShipTwo made its third glide
flight on 17 November 2010. The test flight lasted 11
minutes and 39 seconds and achieved all its objectives,
including expanding SpaceShipTwo’s flight envelope to
283 miles per hour and 3.5 g.
But even after the completion of the flight test
program, Virgin Galactic wants continued improvement
and refinement as SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo
mature and the knowledge base grows. This includes
optimizing performance and making the manufacturing
process more efficient.
152
W
V
IE
5.6g.jpg
31%
As more sections get added, SpaceShipTwo resembles more and more its final
configuration. SpaceShipTwo has a dual hull made of carbon fiber composite outer
and inner shells that sandwich a Nomex honeycomb core. Virgin Galactic/Thierry
Boccon-Gibod
R
SpaceDev, having developed several of the key internal
components on Scaled Composites’ SpaceShipOne
rocket engine and now a subsidiary of Sierra Nevada
Corporation, rejoined the team at Scaled Composites
in August 2008 to assist in the development of the
SpaceShipTwo rocket engine’s internal components. Like
SpaceShipOne, the oxidizer is nitrous oxide and the fuel
is a solid material. The synthetic rubber used as fuel by
SpaceShipOne may not necessarily be the same fuel
used by SpaceShipTwo. The rocket engine can also be
shut down at any time after ignition by simply closing off
the flow of the oxidizer.
In May 2009, the first phase of rocket engine
development completed. Scaled Composites then
published safety guidelines for nitrous oxide usage
relating to rocket engines in June 2009.
As a result of the modifications to the rocket
engine, SpaceShipTwo had to be modified as well.
Two pressurized tanks of helium were added. As a
safety precaution, helium from these tanks will feed
into the oxidizer tank to keep it fully pressurized as
oxidizer flows out of the tank and into the rocket
engine. This has the added effect of making the rocket
ride a little bit smoother compared to SpaceShipOne,
where after about one minute of running, the oxidizer
remaining in the tank makes a liquid-to-gas transition.
This caused SpaceShipOne’s rocket engine to chug
along for a few seconds.
E
Rocket Engine
SpaceShipTwo’s hull is shown being pieced together. These composite sections will
be bonded together much the same way SpaceShipOne was. The section being
added is the top half of the passenger cabin and cockpit. At the back end is the aft
pressure bulkhead. Virgin Galactic
Burt Rutan sits here in the very roomy inside of SpaceShipTwo during the very
early stages of construction. In fact, at this stage it is hard to tell the inside of
SpaceShipTwo from the inside of WhiteKnightTwo. The fuselage of SpaceShipTwo
was designed to be the same inner and outer shapes as the two booms of
WhiteKnightTwo. Virgin Galactic
5.6i.jpg
54%
Though modified with additional safety features, SpaceShipTwo will use a hybrid
rocket engine with a cantilever design as did SpaceShipOne. It will also use liquefied
laughing gas (N2O or nitrous oxide) as the oxidizer and likely solid synthetic rubber
(HTPB or hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene) as the fuel. In this test firing, the rocket
engine uses the same components and systems that will be used in SpaceShipTwo.
Virgin Galactic
153
2/3/11 2:31:53 PM
5.6l.jpg
74%
SpaceShipTwo is more stretched out in relation to SpaceShipOne. This has the effect
of moving the feathered tail booms farther back in proportion to the length of the
fuselage. SpaceShipOne’s feather pivots about halfway from the tip of the nose,
and SpaceShipTwo’s pivots about two thirds of the way back. This is obviously an
advantage for SpaceShipTwo. While passengers certainly want the feather up, not
many passengers would want a window with an obstructed view. Dan Linehan
E
V
IE
W
5.6k.jpg
55%
O
P
Y
5.6j.jpg
59%
C
As the SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo fleet
grows, The Spaceship Company will individually flight
test each vehicle. This procedure is different than for a
certified airliner, where once the type is certified, every
new aircraft built of that type doesn’t go through a flight
test program.
As with airliners, the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) has set up regulations for the operation of
suborbital spacecraft. But a much larger hurdle that
Scaled Composites and Virgin Galactic have faced is
the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). If
this sounds like a strange thing to have to deal with,
just remember that suborbital technology is after all the
basis behind ballistic missiles. So as the first step, Virgin
Galactic will satisfy ITAR requirements by operating
solely in the United States. To fly outside the United
States would require different clearances and will be
part of Virgin Galactic’s future plans.
Even as far as the operation of SpaceShipTwo goes,
since Virgin Galactic is really at the start of a whole new
industry, it will be evolving as it learns from flying back
and forth to space time after time. As Virgin Galactic
demonstrates forward progress, it can expand in ways
154
R
Flight testing for SpaceShipTwo began with captive carries. Kind of like using training wheels on a bicycle, once Scaled Composites felt
comfortable with SpaceShipTwo’s flight characteristics with a little help from WhiteKnightTwo, the next step was to take off the training
wheels and let SpaceShipTwo fly free. Glide flights followed by rocket-powered flights and spaceflights would be the same envelope expansion
progression that had been done with SpaceShipOne. Virgin Galactic/Mark Greenberg
SpaceShipTwo made its maiden flight on 10 October 2010 piloted by Pete Siebold with copilot Mike Alsbury.
SpaceShipTwo released from WhiteKnightTwo at 46,000 feet and expanded the flight envelope out to 207 miles
per hour and 2 g. During its 13 minutes of flying time, SpaceShipTwo completed all its objectives and preformed
better than expectations. Virgin Galactic/Mark Greenberg
that have been planned for and ways that could be
completely unexpected—whether it is variations in the
flight profile, the frequency launch, the training, the
ground experience, or the launch and landing sites.
Time and space will tell.
A Ticket to Ride
Included in the two hundred thousand-dollar price tag
of the trip to space is a three-day ground experience
where passengers get training on their route to earning
astronaut wings. The training covers familiarization
with SpaceShipTwo and spaceflight both on the ground
and aboard WhiteKnightTwo. Since WhiteKnightTwo
is designed to be a trainer as well, passengers will
get to experience some of the low g-force and high
g-force feelings they will encounter during their ride on
SpaceShipTwo. Part of the preparation is also devoted
to team building with the other passengers who will fly
to space together. The training is ultimately designed
by Virgin Galactic to help maximize the passengers’
enjoyment when it comes time to flick the rocket
ignition switch.
By September 2010, Virgin Galactic already had
370 future astronauts signed up, who put just more
than $50 million down in deposits. The first hundred
passengers, called Founders by Virgin Galactic, will have
the order in which they fly to space chosen by a random
drawing. These tickets are already sold out. Pioneers
will make up passengers 101 to 500 and then Voyagers
after that. For these next two groups, a passenger’s
order in the space cue depends upon when they made
their reservations and the size of their space deposit.
Virgin Galactic envisions flying fifty thousand
passengers to space in the first ten years of operation.
Fortunately for most, passengers don’t have to be of
Mercury Seven material. Virgin Galactic reports, “Early
indicators show that the required medical assessment
will be simple and unrestrictive and that the vast
majority of people who want to fly will not be prevented
from doing so by health or fitness considerations.”
As Virgin Galactic moves forward, rides through the
aurora borealis, rides during sunset and during sunrise,
and all kinds of possibilities await.
And to help facilitate booking a spaceflight aboard
SpaceShipTwo, Virgin Galactic has coordinated a global
network of accredited space travel agents. But like any
new technology that hits the market, its price is high.
This has to do partly with recovering development costs.
But as the infrastructure matures, the economy of scale
increases, and competition enters the game, the cost of
a ticket to space will become more down to Earth, but
the ride will still be out of this world.
155
2/3/11 2:31:55 PM
Afterword:
A Star to Steer By
ATTT
Y
air force base
oxygen (molecular)
Advanced Technology Tactical Transport
POC
proof of concept
cc
cubic centimeter
RAF
CG
center of gravity
R&D
research and development
CRV
crew return vehicle
RC
radio control
CTN
case/throat/nozzle
RCS
radar cross section or reaction control system
DARPA
Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency
RLV
reusable launch vehicle
EAA
Experimental Aircraft Association
RPV
remotely piloted vehicle
ERAST
Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology
RTW
round-the-world
FDD
flight director display
SCAT
Scaled Composites Advanced Turboprop
ft
feet (1.00 foot = 0.305 meters)
SCUM
Scaled Composites unit mobile
square feet
sm
statute mile
fpm
feet per minute
SME
shuttle main engine
g
acceleration of gravity
SMUT
Special Mission Utility Transport
gal
gallon (1.00 gallon = 3.79 liters)
SRB
solid rocket booster
hp
horsepower
SS1
SpaceShipOne
HTPB
hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (synthetic rubber)
SS2
SpaceShipTwo
KEAS
knots equivalent airspeed
STOL
short takeoff and landing
KISS
keep it simple stupid
THF
Terminal Hangar Facility
kt
knot, nautical mile per hour (1.00 knot = 1.15 mile per hour)
TONU
Tier One navigation unit
lbs
pounds (1.00 pound = 0.454 kilograms)
TPS
thermal protection system
LEZ
Long-EZ
TSC
The Spaceship Company
L/D
ratio of lift to drag
TST
test stand trailer
LOX
liquid oxygen
VTOL
vertical takeoff and landing
mi
miles (1.00 mile = 1.61 kilometers)
UAV
unmanned aerial vehicle
MONODS
mobile nitrous oxide delivery system
USAF
United States Air Force
mph
miles per hour
VMS
Virgin Mother Ship
NGBA
Next Generation Business Aircraft
VSS
Virgin Space Ship
NGT
Next Generation Trainer
WK
White Knight
nm
nautical mile (1.00 nautical mile = 1.15 statute mile)
WK2
WhiteKnightTwo
N20
nitrous oxide (laughing gas)
wt
weight
O
P
O2
C
V
E
R
156
AFB
ft
IE
Shown circling the Moon in his VariViggen, Burt
Rutan looks forward to the day when he can board
a space hotel and then launch out of Earth orbit to
swing around the Moon. And he has just the design
in mind to do it. Courtesy of Burt Rutan
The days of Apollo are long gone. It was a different
world back then. The days of Space Shuttle are gone,
too. It is a different world now. I was too young for
Apollo to know any better, but I did grow up with a
copy of a Space Shuttle manual, books about the F-14
Tomcat, instrument panel posters of the aircraft my dad
flew for the airlines, and my imagination.
Some of the most influential people in the aviation
industry were kids around the time of the technological
burst in aviation that occurred shortly following the
Wright brothers’ first flight. And a lot of the pioneers of
new space were kids during Apollo. But the question is,
what do the young minds of today have to look forward
to? What will they be watching?
In 2008 something extraordinary happened to me.
My book SpaceShipOne: An Illustrated History had just
come out, and I was at EAA’s AirVenture in Oshkosh
sitting among two rows of other authors in a giant
warehouse filled with books. A little girl walked in and
came straight over to me without even glancing at the
shelves of books or other authors. Before I could even
say hello to her, she said this: “I am five years old. And
by the time I am ten, I’ll be on the Moon. My parents
said I could have any book I want. And I want yours.”
Holy moly, right? So I asked her if I could sign it for
her. She agreed. I wrote that I hoped she would become
a great spacepilot and visit the Moon and stars. And if
she did, would she give me a ride?
I handed her the book. She read the inscription and
gave an emphatic, “Yes.”
The next day, at the same place, she came back and
marched right up to me again and said, “I read the first
chapter. And it was very good.” And then she marched off.
I certainly did not write that book for five-year-olds.
And I wonder how much she has progressed over the
years. I wonder how many others like her are out there
with parents who read to them and encourage their
imaginations and learning.
I wonder who will be the next Burt Rutan aiming for
the stars—homemade models to homebuilt aircraft to
hometown spaceships. Will she be the one?
How long will it take Virgin Galactic and all the other
innovators in this new space age for their visions to turn
to reality? Is this now where the seeds are planted for
the next generation of pioneers?
We borrow this planet for such a short time.
And as individuals we want to make a better world
for our offspring. But this world has become very
interconnected and complicated, and this job has
become much more difficult.
I cannot wait for the time when fifty thousand people
make it to space and get to see this beautiful blue planet.
I cannot wait for each and every one of them to take this
overview and return with it back to Earth.
Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Conversion
W
5.7.jpg
100%
2
157
2/3/11 2:31:56 PM
Appendix: Partial List of Rutan Aircraft Factory and Scaled Composites Models
158
V
Description
RC model of single- place, canard pusher
canard pusher, two-place, wood construction, single-engine, plans ready February 1974
canard pusher, two-place, based off BD-5
canard pusher, two-place, high-efficiency, Volkswagen engine
Model 27 with higher aspect ratio composite wings, plans ready November 1975
improved version of Model 31, aircraft engine, plans ready July 1976
skew wing research aircraft, single-place, twin turbojets
tandem-wing, four-place, push-pull engines
single-engine, four-place, small airplane
early concept for Model 54, like a single-place miniature Model 33, not built
tandem-wing, single-place, Onan engine
biplane with joined wingtips, early concept of Model 120, not built
canard pusher, two-place, high-efficiency, long-range, single-engine, plans ready April 1980
twin turbojet engines at bow put vessel into ground effect to reduce drag
Model 61 powered by FJ107 jet engine
pulse detonation engine research aircraft using Model 61
based off Model 61
tandem-wing, single-place, biplane class air racer, single-engine
concept similar to Model 68 but with joined wingtips, not built
three-surface, four-place, STOL, bush plane, single-engine
subscale flight demonstrator for proposed T-46 trainer, twin turbojets
improved version of Model 40, plans ready June 1984
trimaran, two-place, designed to fly around the world nonstop and nonrefueled, push-pull engines
canard, single-place, self-launching sailplane, plans ready August 1983
model of 36-passenger aircraft, canard, tail-mounted push-pull engines
three-surface, five-place, very low drag, turbocharged engine
canard pusher, two-place, rigid ultralight, single-engine
early concept for ARES, joined wing
early concept for Starship
early concept for Starship
variable geometry canard, twin turboprop pushers, subscale flight demonstrator for next generation business aircraft
three-surface, single-place, crop duster, single-engine
long-range, high endurance vehicle
reconnaissance drone, solid rocket engine and turbojet engine
three surfaces, STOL, subscale flight demonstrator, twin turboprop engines
carbon fiber wing sails for America’s Cup Race, 90 ft and 108 ft spans
Model 133 with reconfigured tail
pusher engine, H-tail, UAV
three-surface, seven-place, business aircraft, twin turbofan FJ-44 engines
canard pusher, manned/unmanned, long-endurance, turbocharged engine
asymmetric fuselage, canard, single-place, close air support combat aircraft, JT15D turbofan engine
testbed for Lexus engine
trimaran, single-place, unlimited class air racer, two 1,000-hp Electramotive engines
subscale rocket-powered, cable-mounted decoy
towed decoy vehicle
pole model subscale model for RCS testing
parachute delivery vehicle for eight personnel
air launched rocket for delivering payloads into space
pressurized gondola for round-the-world balloon flight
high aspect ratio wing, conventional tail, multipassenger, single tractor engine
concept car, four passengers, four doors, high efficiency
asymmetrical configuration, five-place, safe engine out qualities, long-range, twin engines
high-altitude UAV for boost phase missile intercept
blades for wind turbine
high-altitude UAV for Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology program (ERAST)
tilt-rotor UAV
subscale flight demonstrator, single-stage rocket technology
tilt-wing UAV
reentry capsule
two-stage demonstration rocket
high aspect ratio wing, conventional tail, seven-place, business aircraft, JT15D turbofan engine
pressurized gondola for round-the-world balloon flight
early concept for SpaceShipOne, February 1995
forward-swept wing, V-tail, five-place, two turbofan jet engines
crew rescue vehicle for International Space Station
early concept for SpaceShipOne, April 1996
tandem-wing, two-place, high-altitude, utility, two turbofan jet engines
space launch vehicle, rotor system used for landing
RC model for Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology program (ERAST)
low-wing, conventional tail, four-place, fixed landing gear, IO-360 engine
pusher engine, H-tail, UAV
bronco tail, six-place, business/personal aircraft, push-pull, twin turbocharged engines
trimaran, single-place, designed to fly around the world nonstop and nonrefueled, single turbofan engine
early concept for SpaceShipOne, September 1999
early concept for SpaceShipOne, October 1999
suborbital spacecraft, three-place, high wing, feather reentry, hybrid rocket engine, February 2000
VTOL light aircraft, tail sitter
tirmaran, three-place, high-altitude, airborne launch aircraft, twin jet engines
combat UAV, flying wing, no tail, turbofan jet engine
suborbital spacecraft, eight-place, low-wing, feather reentry, hybrid rocket engine
twin boom, sixteen- place, high-altitude, airborne-launch aircraft, four jet engines
eight-place version of Model 202
Y
Tail Number
N27VV
N7EZ
N27VV
N4EZ
N805NA
N78RA
N54Q
N79RA
N3142B
N90EZ
N41GB
N301LS
N80RA
N73RA
N39199
N269VA
N81RA
N187RA
N97ML
N2000S
N480AG
N133SC
N133SC
N143SC
N935SC
N151SC
N178AE
N221BP
N191SC
N24BT
N62270
N2272C
N247VA
N222FJ
N281PR
N990RR
N72TA
N309A
N277SF
N328KF
N318SL
N339SS
N348MS
-
O
P
First Flight Date
18 May 1972
21 May 1975
July 1975
14 March 1976
20 December 1979
30 June 1978
17 November 1977
13 June 1979
September 1980
August 1993
31 January 2008
August 2001
August 1981
22 January 1982
10 September 1981
16 July 1983
22 June 1984
28 May 1982
14 January 1988
30 January 1983
29 August 1983
17 September 1984
June 1986
29 December 1987
May 1988
December 1988
December 1988
12 July 1988
27 February 1987
19 February 1990
April 1990
22 March 1991
April 1991
July 1989
November 1989
April 1990
November 1991
4 November 1991
January 1992
19 June 1996
9 May 1993
April 1994
24 August 1994
June 1993
August 1993
October 1994
1995
14 November 1996
January 1998
13 April 1997
12 March 1998
26 July 1998
March 1999
31 May 2002
2002
21 March 2000
5 March 2004
7 August 2003
1 August 2002
27 July 2001
10 October 2010
21 December 2008
-
C
First Flight
NASA
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
customer
RAF/Voyager Aircraft
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
customer
customer
Scaled Composites
Rutan Designs
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Voyager Aircraft
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Rotary Rocket Company
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
-
W
Fabrication
Ames Industrial
Ames Industrial
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
customer
Ames Industrial
Fred Keller
RAF/Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Rutan Designs
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
Scaled Composites
-
IE
Customer
homebuilders
R&D
homebuilders
homebuilders
NASA
R&D
Quickie Airplane Corp.
homebuilders
U.S. Navy
proprietary
Air Force Research Laboratories/Innovative Science Solutions
proprietary
Danny Mortensen/AMSOIL
R&D
Fairchild Republic
homebuilders
Voyager Aircraft
homebuilders
Beechcraft
Colin Chapman/Lotus
Beechcraft
Advanced Technology Aircraft Corp.
Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical
DARPA
Sail America
DARPA
Israeli Aircraft Industries
Beechcraft
California Microwave
R&D
Toyota
Bob Pond
Sandia National Laboratories
Loral
Northrop Corp.
Lockheed
Orbital Sciences Corporation
Richard Branson/Earthwinds
Toyota
General Motors
Rutan Designs
U.S. Department of Energy
Zond
U.S. Department of Energy/NASA
Bell Helicopter
McDonnell Douglas
Freewing Aircraft
Space Industries
Kistler Aerospace
VisionAire Corp.
Voyager Aircraft
Williams International
NASA
Wyman-Gordon
Rotary Rocket Company
NASA
Toyota
International Systems
Adam Aircraft
Steve Fossett/Virgin Atlantic
Northrop Grumman
Virgin Galactic
Virgin Galactic
-
E
Name
A-12
VariViggen
MiniViggen
VariEze POC
VariViggen SP
VariEze
AD-1
Defiant POC
Quickie
Long-EZ
Power-Augmented-Ram Landing Craft (PARLC)
Jet LEZ Vantage
Borealis
Rodie
AMSOIL Biplane Racer
Grizzly
Next Generation Trainer (NGT)
Defiant
Voyager
Solitaire
Commuter
Catbird
Microlight
Starship POC
Predator
Scarab
Advanced Technology Tactical Transport (ATTT)
Stars and Stripes Wing Sail (H1 and H2)
ATTT Bronco Tail
Searcher
Triumph
CM-44
Agile Responsive Effective Support (ARES)
Lima 1
Pond Racer
Su-25 Rocket-on-a-Rope (ROAR)
TFV
B-2 RCS
PLADS/Rockbox
Pegasus
Earthwinds
Lima 2
Ultralite
Boomerang
Raptor D-1
Z-40 Bladerunner
Raptor D-2
Eagle Eye
DC-X
Freewing
Comet
Kistler Zero
Vantage
Global Hilton
V-Jet II
X-38
Fuji Mini Shuttle POC
Proteus
Roton
Nosejob
Alliance
TAA-1
Seeker
Adam 309
Capricorn GlobalFlyer
SpaceShipOne
White Knight
X-47
SpaceShipTwo
WhiteKnightTwo
-
R
Model
1
27
28
31
32-SP
33
35
40
45
49
54
59
61
61-B
61-PD
61-R
68
69
72
73
74
76
77
78-1
81
97
111
112
113
115
120
127
133
133-B
143
144
151
158
173
175
179
181
191
202
226
226-B
231
233
247
257
267
271
276
280
281
287
302
309
311
312
313
316
317
318
326
339
348
356
159
2/3/11 2:31:56 PM
R
E
V
IE
W
C
O
P
Y
Index
160
Burt Rutan Page v4.indd 160
2/3/11 2:31:56 PM

With Burt Rutan`s Race to Space, Dan Linehan tells the dramatic

Transcription

Similar documents

History of the Long-Ez

Wherever you are. Whenever you need it.

KING AIR C90GTx - Beechcraft

VariViggen - Burt Rutan

FLIGHT SAFETY Technology and the Human Factor

- Gryfair.cz

Final Project sketchbook - Ealing

trophy bipe. - RCGroups.com

Burt Rutan: Icon of Homebuilding…And Space

1965 American Champion – 7ECA Citabria